RE: [Messaging API based on webinos]

Zoltan,

We will review the Intel spec for Messaging and Telephony and get comments back re RCS use cases asap, likely 3 weeks from now as our CPM/RCS lead is on vacation.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kis, Zoltan [mailto:zoltan.kis@intel.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 12:03 PM
To: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
Cc: Mounir Lamouri; public-sysapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: [Messaging API based on webinos]

Hello,

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:16 PM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L <bs3131@att.com> wrote:
>
> In contrast I think that in the short term there is strong value in a distinct API for email, kept to a reasonable balance of functionality and simplicity, as email services are commonly system-level managed (e.g. through account settings) and benefit from shared use of efficient message notification systems (e.g. OMA Push, GCM, APNS, MPNS, ...) and system-level message retrieval.
>
> In the longer term, a combined service API which includes SMS, MMS, email, IM, group chat, etc could be based upon the OMA Converged Packet Messaging (CPM) enabler specification, which is the basis of the Rich Communication Suite (RCS) services that are beginning to be rolled out across the world, as LTE networks and the necessary infrastructure for them (IMS) is deployed. I would welcome the opportunity to start a dialog in that direction, albeit a bit longer term ("Phase 2+"?).

I am happy you brought up this point, and I guess many other operators
would agree with it. I am thinking exactly along the same lines,
especially because I know (based on experience with past products and
services integration) that this is achievable with a minimum extension
of the API. It would be pity leaving it out.
It also applies to the Telephony spec.

Services were introduced in our Telephony and Messaging spec in order
to enable dealing with a uniform handling of user identities +
services, be it SIM card, or XMPP account, or SIP account, or email
account. In fact it just adds an opaque identifier to the Telephony
API, but an object was needed for the Messaging API.

Also, I still see huge value in developing the API's in the same spec,
_in the first round_ at least ,for reasons explained in me previous
email. But let's gather the use cases first.

Could you please read the Intel spec for Messaging and Telephony and
provide feedback from your use cases point of view? This would be very
valuable.

Thanks,
Zoltan

Received on Friday, 4 January 2013 20:35:03 UTC