W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-mobile@w3.org > October 2003

RE: RE : Commercial UAProf 2.0 validation tools

From: <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:06:27 -0400
Message-ID: <5C76D29CD0FA3143896D08BB1743296A0177E602@bsebe001.americas.nokia.com>
To: <boyera@w3.org>, <kimmo.k.halonen@nokia.com>, <www-mobile@w3.org>

Hi Stephane and All,

As you may know, UAProf 2.0 [1] is in OMA's Candidate stage (similar
to the W3C's Candidate Recommendation stage).  As such, it would not
surprise me if implementations were "under way" and that folks may be
somewhat reluctant to publicize such implementations (especially
regarding client-side support).

Implementers - we all know the RDF M&S [1] and 2000 RDF Schema CR [2] have
absolutely no in-band (normative) support for datatyping.  This 
limitation creates severe problems for RDF applications such as CC/PP and 
UAProf that need fine-grained datatyping to validate their data.
Any out-of-band solution to datatyping (e.g. embedding datatyping
information in a comment or putting datatyping information in a separate 
file) is a HACK!

But there is some good news here - the RDF Core WG has been working for 
almost threeeeee years on new specs and those specs contain datatyping in 
RDF [3].  Although the solution is not perfect for mobile data environments
I think it meets the I Can Live With It Test - especially if the
alternative is the type of hacks listed above.  UAProf 2.0 adopts the new 
datatyping in RDF solution.  We believe it is a major step forward
to use in-band (normative) mechanisms to facilitate the automation
of profile validation.

Would the "owners" of Sadic and DELI please indicate whether or not
they intend to support datatyping in RDF (and hence UAProf 2.0)?  And 
if they do not intend to support datatyping in RDF (i.e. UAProf 2.0) why?

Regards,

Art Barstow
---

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/
[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/#documents


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-mobile-request@w3.org [mailto:www-mobile-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of ext boyera stephane
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 5:26 AM
> To: Halonen Kimmo.K (NMP-MSW/Tampere); www-mobile@w3.org
> Subject: RE : Commercial UAProf 2.0 validation tools
> 
> 
> 
> Hello Kimmo,
> 
> Your question is interesting, but unfortunately i do not have any
> answer, but just another question !
> To the best of my knowledge, neither Sadic nor DELI are implementing
> UAProf 2.0. I've neither any information about an existing
> implementation of a UAProf 2.0 aware processor.
> Are you aware of any real world device providing a UAProf 2.0 
> profile ?
> 
> Stephane
> 
> --
> Stephane Boyera		stephane@w3.org
> W3C				+33 (0) 4 92 38 78 34 
> BP 93				fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22
> F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,		  
> France
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-mobile-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:www-mobile-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> > kimmo.k.halonen@nokia.com
> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:52 AM
> > To: www-mobile@w3.org
> > Subject: Commercial UAProf 2.0 validation tools
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Dear All,
> > 
> > has anyone ever heard of any commercial products that could 
> > be used to validate UAProf 2.0 compliant profiles? The UAProf 
> > 2.0 specification can be found behind the following link: 
> > http://www.openmobilealliance.org/documents.ht> ml
> > 
> > I'm 
> > familiar with the publicly available tools like DELI 
> > (delicon.sourceforge.net) and SADiC 
> > (http://www.the-web-middle-earth.com/sadic/sadicOnlineValidato
> r.html). My question is more related to commercial products that could
> be used for this purpose.
> 
> All input is highly appreciated.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
>  Kimmo Halonen        IOP Initiative Specialist             Nokia
>  P.O. Box 1000 (Visiokatu 3)  |  mailto:kimmo.k.halonen@nokia.com   
>  33101 Tampere, FINLAND       |  Tel: +358 (0)7180 77892
> _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 20 October 2003 08:07:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:16:04 UTC