Re: On the roadmap v2

Dear all,
A few specific comments about the roadmap follow:

On Oct 2, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Stephane Boyera wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> v2. I did not see the most recent version comprehensively online -  
>> if it is somewhere other than in documents on the list, please  
>> refer us to it.
> This is a wiki, which means that it is evolving quite a lot quite  
> often. Each time a new release is made, the date mentionned at the  
> top of the document change. The current latest draft is september 25.
>
>> Yes, I agree. Which is why we are running Mobile Tech 4 Social  
>> Change camps in now more than ten cities around the world, the  
>> model of which has been taken up by others who are organizing  
>> communities of practice; have various social media campaigns, and  
>> publish papers on a regular basis on the topic.  That is also why  
>> the Open Mobile Consortium exists, and the new m-Health Alliance  
>> that has come out of the Vodafone/UNF partnership that also has  
>> published overview materials on the state of the field, if you  
>> will.  In other words -- not mentioning the umbrella organizations  
>> that are already in existence and giving them their due place in  
>> the roadmap would be a mistake.
>
> i can surely mention these initiatives.
> In practice, for now, the challenge is still largely existing
>
>>>
>>>> "Recommendations"
>>>> 4.1"Share, cooperate, collaborate...."  that is what  
>>>> MobileActive's about.
>>>
>>> at least you have identified the same issue.
>> Yes, since 2005, in fact.
>> I am not sure why you are saying that quite so dismissively?
>
> :) what can i say ? i'm trying hard to be open to all comments since  
> the beginning of the group. so i don't know why i would say things  
> dismissively. So i just don't want to enter to such discussions, and  
> don't want to reproduce in this forum any kind of flame or war  
> between members, as it happens at some other places.
> The process at W3C is an open one where everybody is able to voice  
> concerns or comments. We are working based on consensus, and on a  
> vendor-neutral basis. The group of people who have been involved in  
> the development of this document since the beginning are all working  
> on tools/product/solutions related to this roadmap, and nobody, and  
> this is a rule of W3C, is trying to push its own solution/ 
> product/... but work towards making a fair assessment of the current  
> situation.
> So now, a more detailed answer as the original was misunderstood.
> You came to the same conclusions around the need of collaboration as  
> some people in this group, and some participants of the workshops we  
> organized. I just said that this is great, and that enforce this  
> conclusion. I understand that you are working towards resolving this  
> challenge with mobileactive.org, and this is great too. There are  
> plenty of other fora existing, including MW4D, which are pursuing  
> the same goal. Honestly, as of today, none of these fora are really  
> successfull in enabling potential users of mobile technologies to  
> collaborate/cooperate/share experience, and we still see everyday  
> new stories starting from scratch new projects on e.g. market  
> prices. So this is still a problem, and that's why we are  
> mentionning it.
>
>> USSD costs the user in South Africa on MTN and Vodacom which are  
>> the two operators I am familiar with. Do not now about Celpay.   
>> Operators have figured out in sub-Saharan Africa that USSD can be  
>> billed for.
>> Sessions are limited to 2 minutes -- which means you can make it  
>> through about nine screens of content.
>> At 150 characters per screen, this makes for a total of  about  
>> 1,350 characters (equivalent to 8 SMSs). USSD costs the user about  
>> R4 in South Africa.
> that's interesting info. so let me summarize: operators are charging  
> the use of the USSD channel, independently of the service provider ?  
> on the eact same basis as sms: as soon as you open an ussd session,  
> you are charged R4 ?
> if this is the case, then i should surely add that in the document.
>
USSD costs are done per time, as USSD is session-based, not packet- 
based.

Here is what vodacom says about ussd billing: http://help.vodacom.co.za/customercare/wss/faq.asp?id=18 
  (they charge per 20 seconds)
Here is MTN's page: http://www.mtn.co.za/SUPPORT/FAQ/Pages/USSD.aspx  
(also charge per 20 seconds)
Unsure whether Cell C has USSD services that are leasable. (A search  
on google "ussd site:cellc.co.za suggests otherwise).


>>> well teh evaluation of costs is based on the current tariff  
>>> structure existing in most country. I doubt that in a phone call  
>>> of 10s you can transfer as much info as in an sms (due to among  
>>> other things the problem of lasting-information).

Well, this is an arguable point, especially on the 30 sec. end of the  
spectrum, and perhaps should be framed as such? In particular, large  
amounts of data (minutes of voice) are much more cheaper with voice,  
while short exchanges (1 or 2 SMSs) are cheaper for SMS, no?
The cost/data-delivery rate for SMS is incredibly high, even under  
current price rates, and this inevitably shows up when dealing with  
large data. The lasting-information point is taken, and well done  
highlighting that!

>>> That said, you are completely right on the fact that there are now  
>>> places where the voice call are far cheaper, and this is  
>>> mentionned in the latest draft of teh roadmap (like india as you  
>>> said)
>> Where is that located?
>
> ssection 6.1.5 costs for the end-user
> "NB: It is important to note that the references used to evaluate  
> the costs of voice applications are based on the pricing scheme  
> currently offered by operators, at the time of writing of this  
> document. However, this pricing scheme might be largely influenced  
> by the regulatory authorities, which might decide to promote voice  
> applications by enforcing low-cost, or flat-rate costs for accessing  
> such applications. It is also important to note that flat-rate plans  
> for voice calls (e.g. within the operator network, or during off- 
> peak hours) are starting to appear in different regions of the  
> World. See announcement of such plans in India: free unlimited calls  
> within the operator,and a pay-per-call model where people pay for a  
> call, independently of its length. "
>
>>>
>>> we mentionned the fact that using SMS as a transport protocol is  
>>> extremely expensive for data delivery. We just separated the  
>>> difficulty to manage multi-cycle interactions as a separate issue.
>> Where is that located?
> section 7.2.2 costs and weaknesses of SMS
>
It might also be worth highlighting that besides being technically  
hard to implement, SMS multi-cycle interactions also end up being  
costly. (USSD the technology shines in this regard, although the need  
to directly deal with operators to lease USSD lines is a significant  
drawback).

Additionally,
section 7.3.3 bullet point #2 seems to suggest that off-line mode  
capability mobile apps still need to be developed. I think there has  
been significant development on this regard, for ex. MXit and  
smartphone-apps that mostly integrate offline access.

> best
> Stephane
> -- 
> Stephane Boyera		stephane@w3.org
> W3C				+33 (0) 5 61 86 13 08
> BP 93				fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22
> F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,		
> France

Prabhas Pokharel
MobileActive.org
prabhas@mobileactive.org
skype: prabhasp

Check out our new site and mDirectory!
Tools, research, case studies and how-tos about mobiles in social  
change work.

http://mobileactive.org

Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 12:18:42 UTC