Re: CC/PP

Hi Mark,
I read you report on capability classes and found it very interesting. Here
are some
comments:

- Content adaptation based on XSLT is interesting in structural
transformation
(e.g. XHTML to WML, HTML to SMIL, etc.) but there is another kind of
adaptation which
is very important and can be seen as the complementary of structural
transformations
which is media resources transformation. A simple example to see that is the
transformation of HTML to WML. In this case, to achieve the adaptation
properly, media
resources used inside the original document (HTML) must also be transformed,
for
instance JPEG to WBMP images.

- The initial definition of classes of devices is benefit but not
sufficient.The number
of the combination of ATOMIC characteristic properties may be infinite. This
implies
that the classes definition will, in all the cases, negligee some kind of
devices.
Further more, we can't envisage all the possible kind of constraints of the
existing
set of devices and also for future devices.

- Devices may be very different, or have just some little difference in
characteristics
properties. This underlines the problem of the abstraction level used in the
definition
of the capability classes. Note that due to just one difference of atomic
characteristics
between two devices, the server may have to deliver two contents which are
completely
different.

- Axes of negotiation depend to the detailed level of the user constraints
declaration
and the capability of the server either by available XSLT style sheets or
other
adaptation methods (scripts, programs, etc.). The number of the required
adaptation
methods (XSLT sheets for instance) depends so to how methods were designed.
In the case
of XSLT we can have parameterable and composite style sheets which can takes
into account
more than one predefined device class.

- A little comment concerning Section 4:
I think that the conditional "lessthan", for boxes, is not the opposite of
the
"greaterthan" conditional (if B1 isn't lessthan B2, this doesn't implies
that B2 is
greaterthan B1). This may causes that there is a set of boxes that are not
comparable and
consequently we can negligee some class of devices using the proposed
conditional.
----------
Tayeb Lemlouma
http://www.inrialpes.fr/opera/people/Tayeb.Lemlouma/index.html
Opera project
National Research Institute in Computer Science and Control (INRIA
Rhône-Alpes, France )
Office B213, phone (+33) 04 76 61 52 81, Fax (+33) 04 76 61 52 07.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Butler, Mark" <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: <tayeb.lemlouma@inrialpes.fr>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 6:21 PM
Subject: FW: CC/PP


>
> > Hi Tayeb,
> >
> > I have just exchanged emails with Nabil Layaida. He said to contact you.
I
> > have been reading you papers on CC/PP and I found them interesting. I am
> > also working on CC/PP - my work is available at
> > http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/.
> > Specifically I have a server-side CC/PP implementation called DELI I
have
> > released on an open-source basis that may be of interest.
> >
> > Incidentally, just a minor point, there are a number of mistakes in your
> > CC/PP on page 9 of "A Framework for Media Resource Manipluation in
> > Adaptation and Negotiation Architecture".
> >
> > - You need to declare a namespace for your elements. This could be
> > prefixed or global, although my preference would be for a prefixed
> > namespace.
> >
> > - The expression
> >
> > heightxwidth<=12000Bytes
> >
> > is not valid XML.
> >
> > - You need to add the additional lines
> >
> > </ccpp:component>
> > </rdf:Description>
> > </rdf:RDF>
> >
> > to the end of the profile.
> >
> > As I say these are very minor points but it would be good to get the
CC/PP
> > correct - if in doubt try checking profiles using the RDF validator at
> > http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/.
> >
> > best regards
> >
> > Mark H. Butler, PhD
> > Research Scientist
> > HP Labs Bristol
> >
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 07:52:15 UTC