W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > August 2010

Re: contact formats -- IETF/OMA/PoCo/W3C convergence?

From: Rich Tibbett <rich.tibbett@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 02:52:17 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTin4dQsXDVb=Ahq6rdanqnkbfurjn8YYriaWSCL6@mail.gmail.com>
To: Chris Messina <chris.messina@gmail.com>, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, Joseph Smarr <jsmarr@google.com>, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Cristina Badulescu <cristina.badulescu@ericsson.com>, Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, jsmarr@stanfordalumni.org, Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>, Mike Hanson <mhanson@mozilla.com>, Suresh Chitturi <schitturi@rim.com>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, simon.perreault@viagenie.ca, public-ietf-w3c <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>, W3C Device APIs and Policy WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, Victoria.Gray@forapolis.com, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, msk@cloudmark.com
The W3C DAP Contacts API is operating in the space between the device and
the web in a similar way to the 'Mozilla Lab's Contacts as First Class
objects' initiative [1]. We're not the first group to need to consider what
'contact' should mean in this mode - whether we accept a device-facing (e.g.
vCard) or web-facing (e.g. PoCo) paradigm or whether there is sane
singularity to be found somewhere in between.

I wonder if discussions within IETF vcarddav on aligning Portable Contacts
and vCard is producing any results and whether vCard v4 is capable of
providing mappings or alignment to Portable Contacts...and by proxy
long-needed clarity to this issue within W3C, prior to publication of the
vCard v4 RFC.

We will not invent a new contact format or a subset thereof within W3C. In
order to make that assumption stick we need some clear signals from your
respective working groups on a unified way forward wrt contact formats.

- Rich

[1] http://mozillalabs.com/contacts

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 2:08 AM, Chris Messina <chris.messina@gmail.com>wrote:

> +jsmarr as the "godfather" of Portable Contacts, who I know has a strong
> opinion on this issue!
> +1 for interest in resolving this issue, and coming out with a *sane*,
> pragmatic path forward.
> Chris
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>wrote:
>> - added Peter Saint-Andre, IETF Apps AD, AD for vcarddav
>> - agreed. we should have a discussion, asap.
>> - I'm available.
>> - suggestion: create a doodle pool for conf call timing.
>> Marc.
>> Le 10-08-25 11:24, Thomas Roessler a écrit :
>>  Hello,
>>> this note is addressed to various individuals involved in contact format
>>> related work at and liaison relationships between W3C, IETF, OMA, and
>>> Portable Contacts.
>>> The W3C Device API WG is working on a JavaScript API for address books:
>>>        http://www.w3.org/TR/contacts-api/
>>> The API's contact data model is currently based on the Portable Contacts
>>> data model.
>>> We understand that the IETF carddav WG would prefer us to base our work
>>> on a model that is compatible with vcard4.  We further understand that the
>>> vcardrev draft has been in WG last call for a while.  It appears that there
>>> have been recent comments on the IETF carddav WG's mailing list that suggest
>>> a discussion about alignment between PoCo and vcard4.
>>> Further, we have received a liaison note from OMA that suggests that we
>>> possibly adapt OMA's Converged Address Book work.  We understand that the
>>> OMA format is about to be frozen as well:
>>> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/docs/OMA-LS_877-OMA_COM_to_W3C_Contact_Fields_Attachment-20100823-A.pdf
>>> The W3C Device API WG is currently reviewing the various specifications
>>> and trying to see in detail where the formats agree or disagree; that work
>>> should be done within a week.  (Kudos to Rich Tibbett at Opera Software.)
>>> It sounds like an informal discussion about overall directions for the
>>> various contacts formats, based on that review, would be beneficial in order
>>> to see whether further fragmentation can be avoided.  We're willing to host
>>> a phone conference for this conversation at W3C.
>>> The purpose of this e-mail is to see whether there is interest in this
>>> sort of conversation, and whether there are timing considerations that we
>>> all should be aware of.
>>> Regards,
>>> --
>>> Thomas Roessler, W3C<tlr@w3.org>   (@roessler)
>> --
>> =========
>> IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
>> Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
>> DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
>> NAT64-DNS64 Opensource: http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
> --
> Chris Messina
> Open Web Advocate, Google
> Personal: http://factoryjoe.com
> Follow me on Buzz: http://buzz.google.com/chrismessina
> ...or Twitter: http://twitter.com/chrismessina
> This email is:   [ ] shareable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2010 00:53:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:22 UTC