RE: is CC/PP worth using

Sandeep

M-GET and M-POST are mandatory, whereas GET and POST are optional.

Therefore I'd expect most browsers to use GET and POST as users will prefer
browsers that try to retrieve content even if it cannot be adapted for the
device rather than not display content at all. Current servers do not
respond to M-GET. For example Tomcat replies

HTTP/1.0 501 Not Implemented
Content-Type: text/html
Servlet-Engine: Tomcat Web Server/3.2.1 (JSP 1.1; Servlet 2.2; Java 1.3.0;
Windo
ws 2000 5.0 x86; java.vendor=Sun Microsystems Inc.)

<head><title>Error: 501</title></head>
<h1>Error: 501</h1>
<h2>Location: /ccpp/headers/index.cgi</h2><b>Method M-GET is not defined in
RFC
2068 and is not supported by the Servlet API </b><br></body>

So yes this means that servers need to parse the request in order to
determine if CC/PP is being used. 

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandeep K Gain [mailto:sandeep.gain@riverrun.com]
Sent: 16 August 2001 09:55
To: 'Johan Hjelm'; sandeep.gain@riverrun.com
Cc: www-mobile@w3.org
Subject: RE: is CC/PP worth using


thanx johan for your valuable comments

Just one more question , if you don't mind :)
Is it expected from the origin servers that they will parse for profile and
profile-diff HTTP extension headers , even when a GET or a POST request is
sent , instead of the M-GET and M-POST as in the HTTP extension framework?
In brief , how do the origin servers know that CC/PP is being sent(in
absence of HTTPex) .. May be its a very trivial question , but still ...

thanx & regards,
Sandeep

-----Original Message-----
From: Johan Hjelm [mailto:johan.hjelm@era-t.ericsson.se]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 1:17 PM
To: sandeep.gain@riverrun.com
Cc: www-mobile@w3.org
Subject: Re: is CC/PP worth using


Actually, I was just made aware that the WAP UAPROF spec, chapter 9,
contains
just such a protocol. You will have to look it up, it looks really weird
when I
try to copy and paste from Word. But it looks like it takes care of Marks
comments.

As for the future of CC/PP, I am of course biased. Yes, we will rule the
world
and eat the cake, too. However, all legacy servers will never implement all
new
technologies. That will never happen. So you can not expect total
penetration.

As an aside, I am increasingly convinced about the value of the approach
using a
default with overrides. Of course, you need a structure like CC/PP to keep
stuff
in. But I participate in discussions in lots of other places, and the
approach
keeps getting validated.

Concerning the vocabulary, the answer is "maybe". The attributes are there,
and
things like screensize and colour are not specific to WAP. However, you
would
have to look at it yourself to say whether it covered all your needs. I was
just
in a teleconference with another group in our company, who is adding a set
of
attributes in a namespace of their own in a standard they are producing (you
may
find out when it is finished). So that is a viable option, but I agree with
Lalitha that you need the support of an organization for it to be accepted.

Hope that answers the question
Johan

Sandeep K Gain wrote:

> folks,
>   First a general background on what I am up to.
>
> I am developing a server that generates content according to the HTTP
> User-Agent header information.
> We have got our own browser sort of application running on Palm and
> WindowsCE based devices .
> The application running on these devices request content from my server
and
> I generate content according to them . The content sent to them currently
is
> XHTML.
> In future we wish our application gets content from all sites on the
> internet.
> Now we wish to get hardware/software/application specific information from
> the client and then generate the content according to that .
> so far , its fine .
>
> Now, if we implement CC/PP , we will be able to have our application
> runnning , as the server will understand the CC/PP information.
> My question is should we really use CC/PP , becoz if all that is to be
done
> is just to pass this information, then we can pass this in our own
protocol
> (which we have).
> Is CC/PP here to stay , i mean are we anticipating that most of the
internet
> sites will gradually become CC/PP aware.
> Can CC/PP be implemented over HTTP without using the HTTPex framework?
> And is UAProf vocabulary sufficient , or is it just for WAP applications.I
> mean, I wish to use UAProf vocab for CC/PP from my Palm and WindowsCE
based
> applications , can i do so?
>
> your insightful comments please
> regards,
> sandeep

--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  Johan Hjelm, Senior Specialist
     Ericsson Research Japan

  Read more about my recent book
http://www.wireless-information.net
************************************

Received on Thursday, 16 August 2001 06:37:42 UTC