RE: Device Description definition

I look at this from the perspective of developers. They probably want to
know "is this value for this property likely to change during the period
of a session?". If the answer is yes, the property is dynamic. If no,
the property is static.

In this case, screen orientation would be static for some devices, and
dynamic for others. The size of the screen is likely to be static for
all devices, and for a particular family of devices the value will be
globally static. The IMEI is certainly static for all instances, from
this perspective.

However, the IMEI is a per-instance property. It is not globally static.
So perhaps we need to reflect this in the DDR. I wonder how much more
complexity would be introduced to the ontology if we now have to
differentiate between global and instance properties, as well as
static/dynamic.

---Rotan.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Jo Rabin
Sent: 23 March 2007 12:30
To: Andrea Trasatti; public-ddwg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Device Description definition


When we say "dynamic properties", I wonder if it would be useful to
distinguish "dynamic properties of a device class" from "dynamic
properties of a device instance". 

It seems to me that the IMEI of a device instance is not dynamic whereas
the screen orientation is. I can see that the IMEI of a device class
might be considered dynamic, but wouldn't it be less prone to
misinterpretation to call it device specific?

What we are getting at in both cases is that you can't tell what it is
in an a priori way. That doesn't mean it's dynamic, necessarily.

Jo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
On
> Behalf Of Andrea Trasatti
> Sent: 23 March 2007 11:33
> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Device Description definition
> 
> 
> I agree the IMEI is a very interesting example that really lives on
> the edge between being static (TAC) and dynamic (full IMEI associated
> with a single device instance).
> 
> - Andrea
> 
> 
> Il giorno 20/mar/07, alle ore 18:33, Anders Ekstrand ha scritto:
> 
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Regarding this specific example, we could discuss the possibility to
> > represent the first part of the IMEI - the TAC-number.
> >
> > Best Regards - Anders
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
> > On
> >> Behalf Of Smith, Kevin, VF-Group
> >> Sent: den 20 mars 2007 17:53
> >> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
> >> Subject: RE: Device Description definition
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Regarding the scope of the device description definition: static
> >> properties are in scope of the repository, but I imagine we want to
> >> exclude those which are specific to an individual device and are
> >> sensitive. I'm thinking specifically of an individual mobile
device's
> >> IMEI but it may also include installed certificates. Is there a
> >> way we
> >> should represent this in the Device Description Definition?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >
> >
> > _____________________________________
> > Anders Ekstrand
> > Director Global Support
> > Drutt Svenska AB
> > Phone:  +46 31 83 66 67
> > Mobile: +46 733 200 238
> > Fax:    +46 31 83 66 99
> > Web:    www.drutt.com
> > _____________________________________
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
> > On
> >> Behalf Of Smith, Kevin, VF-Group
> >> Sent: den 20 mars 2007 17:53
> >> To: public-ddwg@w3.org
> >> Subject: RE: Device Description definition
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Regarding the scope of the device description definition: static
> >> properties are in scope of the repository, but I imagine we want to
> >> exclude those which are specific to an individual device and are
> >> sensitive. I'm thinking specifically of an individual mobile
device's
> >> IMEI but it may also include installed certificates. Is there a
> >> way we
> >> should represent this in the Device Description Definition?
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

Received on Friday, 23 March 2007 12:42:18 UTC