W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-di@w3.org > January 2006

Comments on DCI

From: Keith Waters <kwaters@ftrd.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:33:22 -0500
Message-Id: <E20835A4-63AE-407F-A4C8-EBA88E5D5775@ftrd.us>
Cc: www-di@w3.org, "W3C DIWG (E-mail)" <w3c-di-wg@w3.org>
To: Claes.Nilsson@obigo.com

Claes,

thank you for you comments on the 2nd last call of Delivery Context:  
Interfaces (DCI)
Accessing Static and Dynamic Properties, W3C Working Draft 11  
November 2005.
We appreciate you input.

Below are the groups response:

Nilsson#1: DCI specifies a general framework for HTML pages to access  
device
properties. However, the tangible set of device properties to access  
is not
included in the DCI specification. Which are the plans for the  
definition of
these properties? Do you have any cooperation with other W3C groups  
or with
other standardization organizations? Alternatives are for example to  
look at
the OMA UAProf properties or to start out from the JSR APIs and to  
create
ECMAscript bindings.

Response:  In the introduction ( http://www.w3.org/TR/DPF/#sec- 
introduction ) we do state
that "the Delivery Context Interfaces are designed to allow for  
properties to be defined by
different organizations. For instance, the W3C Device Independence  
Activity [DevInd]
is working on defining a set of core presentation attributes. The  
Open Mobile Alliance
[OMA] (formerly known as the WAP Forum) has developed a set of  
properties for describing
static characteristics of mobile phones. Device vendors are expected  
to define additional
properties for proprietary features."

Nilsson#2: In appendix B there are two informative use cases for DCI.  
However, we
would like to see more tangible use cases in order to achieve a better
understanding of the motivation for DCI and what it can be used for.

Response: Agreed. There are no more examples in spec, but as  
implementations
are created examples may well be published in a separate document.

Nilsson#3: Security is important. Values can be set by scripts and  
there must be
functionality for access control. Should there functionality to  
distinguish
between any 3rd party web site and "safe" sites? Should there be a
separation of "safe" properties that can be accessed by any site and
"sensitive" properties that can be accessed only by "safe" sites.

Response: We will update the draft to (section 8.1) to provide a  
listing of exceptions
that would be raised during security and access right violations. It  
is up to the
implementation to raise those events under the appropriate conditions  
for the appropriate
properties.

Nilsson#4: The interpretation of the acronym DCI is inconsistent. At  
some places in
the specification it is said to mean "Device Context Interfaces" and at
other places it is said to mean "Delivery Context Interfaces".

Response: Thanks! We will do the necessary editorialization.

Nilsson#5: For your information: Within the OMA BAC-UAProf working  
group there is an
activity called "Device Profiles Evolution" (DPE) that aims a  
defining an
enhanced device profiles mechanism which allows a device to convey the
dynamic capabilities to a service provider in real time, thereby  
ensuring
that the service provider can provide content best suited to the
capabilities of the device at that time. As this activity deals with the
problems of addressing dynamic changes of device characteristics  
there may
be connection points between the work with W3C DCI and OMA DPE.

Response: Thank you for the update, we are aware of OMA and are  
working with them.

-Keith Waters
DCI lead
Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2006 21:35:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C0.50 : Wednesday, 18 January 2006 21:35:59 GMT