RE: Contacts API

Hi. All.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wonsuk Lee [mailto:wonsuk11.lee@samsung.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 9:56 PM
> To: 'EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA'; 'Suresh Chitturi'; 'Wonsuk Lee'
> Cc: 'Adam Barth'; public-sysapps@w3.org; 'Christophe Dumez - SISA';
> cpgs@samsung.com
> Subject: RE: Contacts API
> 
> Hi. Eduardo and Suresh.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA [mailto:efc@tid.es]
> > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 6:50 PM
> > To: Suresh Chitturi; Wonsuk Lee
> > Cc: wonsuk11.lee@samsung.com; Adam Barth; public-sysapps@w3.org;
> > Christophe Dumez - SISA (ch.dumez@sisa.samsung.com)
> > Subject: RE: Contacts API
> >
> > Hi Suresh, Wonsuk, et al.
> >
> > On 28 feb 2013 at 06:52:21, Suresh Chitturi wrote:
> > > Hi Wonsuk,
> > >
> > > .....
> > > ....
> > >
> > > From: Wonsuk Lee [mailto:wonsuk73@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday,
> > > February 27, 2013 11:25 PM To: Suresh Chitturi Cc: EDUARDO FULLEA
> > > CARRERA; wonsuk11.lee@samsung.com; Adam Barth; public-sysapps@w3.org
> Subject: Re:
> > > Contacts API
> > >
> > > Hi. Suresh and all.
> > > Concerning to co-ordination issues on overlap areas btw DAP and
> > > SysApps WG, I sent a feedback to DAP WG like [1]. So far I didn't
> > > get any comment, so I would like to bring Contacts API spec to FPWD.
> > > But before that, I would like to get feedback for below comments in
> > > [1] from the groups (esp. editors of this spec). What do you think?
> > >
> > > Suresh>> Not being a member of Sys Apps group, I would let the
> > > Suresh>> editors
> > > comment first, but generally there is a strong interest/support on
> > > the DAP side for harmonization of the contact formats and semantics.
> > > The current contact format in DAP (independent of intents or
> > > non-intents
> > > approach) is the outcome of many prior discussions and viewed to be
> > > the best way forward without creating a dependency on a specific
> > > underlying formats but instead taking a "minimum subset' approach
> > > that can be implemented on top of underlying implementations (of
> > > course with
> > an extensible mechanism).
> > > Contact formats in general is a moving target and therefore basing
> > > the APIs on a single format might be risky path!
> > >
> >
> > I agree we should aim at aligning the contact's data model between DAP
> > and SysApps specs. Actually the differences are not that big, so it
> > should not be a problem. I propose the editors collaborate to reach this
> alignment.
> > In any case the changes are mainly about naming or grouping of
> > attributes, so IMO nothing so meaningful that should prevent the
> > SysApps Contacts API draft to go to FPWD.
> 
> I agreed with this. Based on the consensus for aligning the contact's data
> model between DAP and SysApps specs, I would like to bring current
> proposal to CfC in the group. 

Sorry for confusion. We already had done CfC for Contact APIs in the early of Feb. In addition, it seems we have a consensus for aligning the contact's data model between DAP and SysApps specs.
Therefore it seems CfC is passed.

Dave, could you help to prepare FPWD for Contact APIs?

Best regards,
Wonsuk.

 
> Best regards,
> Wonsuk.
> 
> >
> > > <comments>
> > >
> > > In particular, regarding Contacts, we may want to (a) make sure that
> > > the data formats and meaning are consistent (fo interoperability)
> > > (b) ask whether similar APIs across two groups should share a common
> > > API style and practices [2] and maybe even details apart from
> > > optional parameters or intentionally be different (whether it is
> > > better to enable commonality or make clear distinctions) </comments>
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Feb/0067.
> > > h tml [2] API checklist,
> > > http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/ApiCheckList
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Wonsuk
> > >
> > > 2013/2/9 Suresh Chitturi <schitturi@rim.com> Hi Eduardo, all,
> > >
> > > Just wanted to point your attention to a parallel discussion [1] on
> > > Contacts API in DAP WG, with a bigger matter being the co-ordination
> > > between the DAP and SysApps on overlapping areas.
> > > Might make sense to wait just a little bit before proceeding to
> > > FPWD, given the impact this can have on the same.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Feb/0051.
> > > ht
> > > ml
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Suresh
> > >
> > > EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA wrote on January 31, 2013 3:13 AM:
> > >> Hi Wonsuk, Adam,
> > >>
> > >> I didn't receive any feedback on this topic. Could we propose the
> > >> Contacts API draft as FPWD?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks and regards,
> > >> Eduardo.
> > >>
> > >> EDUARDO FULLEA CARRERA wrote on e enero de 2013 17:38:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> The authors of the two different Contacts API proposals agreed to
> > >>> take [1] as baseline, and issued a pull request to place the other
> > >>> proposal in a subfolder (/Contacts / input_docs) for future
> reference.
> > >>>
> > >>> Taken that into account I propose we publish current draft as FPWD.
> > >>> Adam, Wonsuk, what do you think?
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>> Eduardo.
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]
> > >>> http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Contacts/Contacts.html
> > >>>
> > >>> ________________________________
> > >>>
> > >>> 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
> > >>
> > >> ________________________________
> > >>
> > >> 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
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > - This transmission (including any attachments) may contain
> > > confidential information, privileged material (including material
> > > protected by the
> > > solicitor- client or other applicable privileges), or constitute
> > > non-
> > public information.
> > > Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended
> > > recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
> > > error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this
> > > information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or
> > > reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not
> > authorized and may be unlawful.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > 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 Monday, 4 March 2013 13:07:48 UTC