RE: on Messaging

Hi Zoltan, thanks for your comments.

On 31 ene 2013 at 12:20:11, Kis, Zoltan wrote:
> Hi Eduardo,
>
>> I have already published a new version of the Messaging API draft,
>> which is available at:
>> http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging/Messaging.html

>
> There are a lot of good things in this spec, but also there are many
> things I'd do in different way. Some of these are somewhat subjective,
> some others are relative to functionality. From the functional issues: -
> could you update the proposal with support for multiple SIM's, and
> multiple transports (e.g. SMS over SIP);

This is something we are already looking at

>- make sure the spec can be
> extended with support for IM and email, if someone wants it, i.e. don't
> reserve the navigator.messaging namespace for SMS/MMS only. For
> instance, I would prefer a navigator.[messaging.]sms,
> navigator.[messaging]mms , etc way of grouping functionality, each
> having a send() interface. IMO it would also help in supporting multiple
> services and separating the various messaging interfaces, while keeping
> the possibility to have a unified interface.
>

Fine not to reserve the broad navigator.messaging namespace, but I would go for something that encompasses both SMS and MMS. In most cases these two technologies are handled together by a single client so it makes sense to deal with them with a single manager. For instance to be able to search for SMS and MMS in a single request. I note that your proposal [1], if I understand it correctly, does not allow for that, as the find method is specific to a service.

I will change from messaging to SmsMmsManager

[1] http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging/Messaging_Intel.html


> Since it seems there are so different views, should we start by
> deconstructing, and build up a new proposal under joint editorship, by
> - listing the use cases (I can provide some)
> - agree on the structures
> - define functions, events, asynchronous behaviour
> - define iterators, filters etc.
>
> For kicking that off I think a face to face meeting would be the best.
> Based on talks so far it seems that a European location would be best
> (so far either Madrid or Helsinki), for 2-3 days, somewhere between
> February 25 and March 8 (so far suitable for Intel, Telefonica, AT&T).
> It can also be earlier from our part.
>
> Best regards,
> Zoltan

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx

Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 15:02:45 UTC