- From: Kazuhiro Kitagawa <kaz@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2001 10:30:58 +0900
- To: www-mobile@w3.org
> Our problem is time - the working group is rapidly diminishing in number and committment with the > finishing-up of the spec being simultaneous with a downturn in the industry. hum, too bad. i think (the idea of) cc/pp is right on. i am in the middle of determining if i should extend our product to support cc/pp natively both for device and user profiles maybe for content negotiation. still not sure if i would implement the whole cc/pp spec though. ceo > -----Original Message----- > From: www-mobile-request@w3.org [mailto:www-mobile-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Johan Hjelm > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 9:23 PM > To: Butler, Mark > Cc: 'cafe babe'; www-mobile@w3.org > Subject: Re: Any CC/PP App servers in the market > > > Thanks Mark for those good comments. Our problem is time - the > working group is > rapidly diminishing in number and committment with the > finishing-up of the spec > being simultaneous with a downturn in the industry. > > We are trying to wrap up the spec to go to candidate > recommendation now, and > then we will recharter the group to restart the work (I know, I > have been saying > that for a while now). One reason is for that is to do the protocol work > properly - the numerical namespaces in the HTTP header comes from the HTTP > Extension Framework, and that was actually more or less a > political decsion. It > would have been much cleaner to do a new HTTP header, but we were > not allowed to > do so at the time. So modifications of the servlets is as well to > put off until > then. > > We have not been tracking resources on our web pages for the > simple reason that > there has only been a couple, but now there are at least four > publicly available > ones, so that is something we should do. > > One more comment, about device classes: It works fine as long as > you can assume > that devices do not diverge from a class. But as soon as they do, > you have a > problem. I would expect heuristics to be written to determine > that there is an > 80% fit, and that is fine (but someone has to determine WHICH > 80%, and declare > it!). To be sure, if your device conforms to a class (who determines > conformance?), you can always send an override for the little > extras that you > have built in. But there has to be a full description of the > class somewhere. > > Vladimir, would you mind sharing your device classes and > definitions with us? I > am sure it would be useful. > > Johan > > "Butler, Mark" wrote: > > > As far as I know there are no CC/PP enabled app servers on the market - > > current servers use the User-Agent string and then often use their own > > device capability database. For an example of this, see the > device.xml file > > in the Morphis open source device transcoder > (http://www.morphis.org/) or > > the BrowserImpl.xml file in the Cocoon 2 framework > > (http://xml.apache.org/cocoon). > > > > Furthermore as far as I am aware, no-one seems to have > considered whether > > the proposed CC/PP (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-CCPPexchange) and UAProf > > > (http://www1.wapforum.org/tech/terms.asp?doc=WAP-248-UAProf-200105 > 30-p.pdf) > > protocols will be compatible with the current HTTP servlet API. I'm > > currently trying to determine whether current app servers can use the > > proposed CC/PP and UAProf protocols or whether this will > necessitate changes > > to the base servlet API. Personally I think it would be better to use a > > protocol that is compatible with the javax.servlet.http API, > and derive a > > new API(s) from that specifically for CC/PP and UAProf. > > > > Specifically current servers such as Tomcat will respond to some CC/PP > > requests. There are two problems: Firstly the HTTPex numerical namespace > > seems to add unnecessary complexity - perhaps someone from the > CC/PP working > > group could explain the rationale behind this? Secondly > including carriage > > returns in the XML file associated with a profile-diff causes > problems with > > the current servlet API. For example if I send the following > CC/PP request > > to a simple HTTP request snooping servlet on a Tomcat server > > > > GET /ccpp/headers/index.cgi HTTP/1.1 > > Host: localhost > > Opt: "http://www.w3.org/1999/06/24-CCPPexchange"; ns=19 > > 19-Profile: "http://www.aa.com/hw", "http://www.bbb.com/sw", > > "1-uKhJE/AEeeMzFSejsYshHg==" > > 19-Profile-Diff-1: <?xml version="1.0"?> > > <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-syntax-19990105#" > > xmlns:PRF="http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-profile-vocabulary#"> > > <Description ID="SoftwarePlatform" PRF:Sound="On" /> > > </RDF> > > > > Then I can successfully retrieve the file from Tomcat once, but > subsequent > > retrievals or not always possible as Tomcat reports > > > > Parse error, missing : in > > mlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-syntax-19990105#" > > > > This problem can be avoided by omitting carriage returns in the enclosed > > XML. However this requirement is not mentioned in either the CC/PP and > > UAProf protocol specs! The request above does not cause a > problem for Apache > > with a CGI HTTP request snooping Perl script, but I suspect > other servers > > using the servlet API will have similar problems. > > > > Of course once your server has got the profile, then there's > the problem of > > what to do with it! This also needs "further development" just like > > vocabularies. Stuart Lewis, a student at University of Wales at > Aberystwyth > > (sdl@aber.ac.uk) has a project report that discusses this. I've just > > finished a technical report that investigates implementing > HTTP/1.1 content > > negotiation for CC/PP and UAProf using the JENA RDF API (see > > http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/bwm/rdf/jena/index.htm) that should be > > published externally this month. Another comment to the CC/PP > working group: > > please could you start keeping track of these resources in a > similar way to > > the RDF working group? > > > > Once a servlet API is defined, I think the next step would be > to add CC/PP > > support to open-source frameworks like Cocoon, Struts, and > Jetspeed (see my > > technical report at http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/ for > more details > > of how these frameworks can be used for device independence). > They already > > try to address the problem of content adaptation, so it makes > sense to use > > them to demonstrate how CC/PP can be used to provide content to multiple > > devices. > > > > Incidentally feedback on my comments on HTTPex, servlet APIs > etc from the > > CC/PP working group is welcome! > > > > Mark H. Butler > > HP Labs Bristol > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cafe babe [mailto:cafe_babe@hotmail.com] > > Sent: 15 August 2001 16:34 > > To: www-mobile@w3.org > > Subject: Any CC/PP App servers in the market > > > > Just curious to know, are there any commercially available > Application/Web > > servers in the market that are capable of using the CC/PP > information in a > > client request to generat customized content for a client. > > I remember seeing some CC/PP classes in Jigsaw the W3C web server. BEA > > Weblogic mentions something about device profiles but I am not > sure if it > > uses CC/PP for content customization. > > Quite a few Application server vendors(Oracle,IBM,BEA to name > a few) in > > the msrket today say that they are capable of customizing > content for all > > different kinds of devices(phones,PDAs,TVs etc) and that they > are extensible > > to support any new devices in the future. What I am not clear is that do > > they mean that they can support any device that can render > XHTML/HTML/WML, > > in whuch case the HTTP "Accept" header would be sufficient, or they mean > > that they can use a CC/PP kind of mechanism to do further customization > > based on other parameters like display size, media support etc. > > Inputs on this would be really appreciated. > > Thanks > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > -- > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Johan Hjelm, Senior Specialist > Ericsson Research Japan > > Read more about my recent book > http://www.wireless-information.net > ************************************ > >
Received on Monday, 3 September 2001 21:31:07 UTC