- From: Alastair Angwin <alastair_angwin@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 07:41:25 +0100
- To: <Jean-Francis.ahanda@net2s.com>
- Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org, www-mobile@w3.org, www-mobile-request@w3.org
As has been said ... the IMEI can be used to know about the radio device
being used. But that does not assure knowledge of the client capabilities
e.g. laptop / PDA with GPRS card. There is much more than is needed to be
known.
Alastair J Angwin,
Mail To : IBM UK Laboratories, Hursley Park, Winchester, Hampshire, SO21
2JN, UK
Tel: +44-(0)1962-816817 ... Fax: +44-(0)1962-819777 ...Mobile:
+44-(0)7703-128131
Email: Lotus Notes : Alastair Angwin/UK/IBM or ANGWIN@IBMGB
Internet : alastair_angwin@uk.ibm.com
angwin@uk.ibm.com
External IEA : GBIBMX59@IBMMAIL
"Jean-Francis
AHANDA" To: <public-ddwg@w3.org>, <www-mobile@w3.org>
<Jean-Francis.ahanda cc:
@net2s.com> Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
Sent by:
www-mobile-request@w
3.org
25/07/2005 22:57
Please respond to
Jean-Francis.ahanda
Each mobile device is suppose to have an IMEI ( Blackberry include) i'm not
sure that without IMEI you can register on mobile network ,specialy when
most of the mobile operators are installing EIR on their network to
blacklist stollen or non compatible device.
Yes is possible to associate IMEI to device capabilities.
Jean-Francis
From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Luca Passani
Sent: lundi 25 juillet 2005 20:39
To: public-ddwg@w3.org; www-mobile@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
This is an interesting point, which brings about two questions:
- since you work for O2, I am assuming you know better.
Honestly, I was assuming that there is no such thing as a device
without IMEI as long as it is accepted on a carrier’s Network. Don’t
BlackBerry’s have IMEIs? I know that operators have databases of IMEI
and they are building services on top of IMEI info.
- Does O2 possess a way to associate IMEI to device
capabilities? if yes, how is this achieved?
Luca
From: Holley Kevin (Centre) [mailto:Kevin.Holley@O2.com]
Sent: 25 July 2005 17:28
To: Luca Passani; public-ddwg@w3.org; www-mobile@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
So what happens if the mobile device doesn't have an IMEI?
For example, a PDA based browser.
Regards,
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Luca Passani
Sent: 22 July 2005 00:10
To: public-ddwg@w3.org; www-mobile@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
Yes, this is something we have discussed quite a few times in the
WURFL community. The idea is to have an extra table to match the
first part of the IMEI with a WURFL ID. This would allow an operator
to easily detect device capabilities even without an HTTP Request
coming from subscriber device.
The reason why we have not embarked in such a project is that
developers typically do not have access to a device IMEI to start
with.
Having said this, there is increasing interest in WURFL coming from
operators, so I would say that IMEI support in WURFL is bound to
happen sooner or later.
If you like this proposition (and you have a database of IMEI to
share and expertise in the field), please contact me offline. We
could work together on this for the developer community’s benefit.
Thanks
Luca
From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Victor Servin
Sent: 21 July 2005 14:55
To: Rotan Hanrahan
Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org; www-mobile@w3.org; Steve Parker
Subject: Re: Mobile phone capabilities list?
well in the way i see it most mobile development today, are least for
phones, are made towards content delivery and related things so u
usuallay need full information about phonecapabilities i mean gprs
type, Egprs type, Audio compatibility, video compatibility and so on.
It will be very difficult to fullfill the needs of several companies
and developers but it would be good to create a more standarized and
extensible model to do it. It would be also great to improve IMEI
databases cause if we think uaprofs are difficult to deal with,
imei's are impossible. Its there any project to try to merge this two
identifiers. In the end both of then are usefull to describe the same
device, at least when we talk about cell phones.
VJS
On 7/21/05, Rotan Hanrahan <Rotan.Hanrahan@mobileaware....com> wrote:
Several companies create and maintain their own validated device
information repositories, which are supersets of the information
available in public. However, it takes great effort to create these
repositories and they are generally created in support of specialised
products. As a consequence, these repositories are out of reach
because they are expensive. I am pleased to report that certain key
suppliers of such repositories/products are participating in W3C MWI,
with the hope that their experience may be applied to the situation
that you suggest is the case today. An extensible, accurate,
verified, trusted baseline repository of device descriptions is one
of the items on the table, which requires the participants to examine
carefully how such a repository might operate. Much of the work will
be conducted with input from the wider community, so I welcome and
encourage the feedback expressed on the public lists.
---Rotan
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Parker [mailto: sparker@well.com]
Sent: 21 July 2005 00:30
To: Rotan Hanrahan; Holley Kevin (Centre); www-mobile@w3.org
Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
Formally, these are certainly the right standards/groups, but the
track record is disappointing in practise. In my experience, the
UAProf info actually supplied is not necessarily accurate or
complete. The URLs are not always present or correct. There is no
mechanism or procedure for correcting it - its entirely at the
manufacturers' whim. Even when the data are ok, there's a lot of
useful parameters missing from the standard. There's supposed to be a
Java API, but I had to report a bug in the JSR reference
implementation months after it was approved. It's very frustrating to
anyone actually trying to cater for all the different devices right
now. Standards are one thing, but to get something working, now,
WURFL is the only show in town. I'm not an open source zealot, but
WURFL has gone further faster than the standards bodies. It works as
advertised, it's responsive, it's simple to use, it's user extensible
.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: www-mobile-request@w3.org [mailto:www-mobile-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Rotan Hanrahan
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 2:07 PM
To: Holley Kevin (Centre); www-mobile@w3.org
Cc: public-ddwg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Mobile phone capabilities list?
The UAProf information, where provided and validated, can provide
some essential and objective information about mobile devices. It
has been recognised, however, that in many domains of content
authoring and adaptation that such information is insufficient. The
DDWG will be exploring the bigger picture, and looking at ways that
a general device description repository could be achieved, such that
it can encompass UAProf and other sources of information, avoiding
replication of services, and providing the necessary features of
discovery, trust, efficiency and related information management
issues. The DDWG is specifically directed to liaise with UAProf and
other related groups to this end. Planned W3C Notes will explain in
further detail, and these shall get a public airing during this
year. Input from interested parties via the public mailing list will
be encouraged. The group will also solicit specific information from
key parties where appropriate.
I hope this adds some clarity.
---Rotan.
[ .... see mailing list archive for previous messages ... ]
=====================================================
This electronic message contains information from O2 which may be
privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use
of the individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended
recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying distribution or use of the
contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this
electronic message in error, please notify us by telephone or email (to the
numbers or address above) immediately.
=====================================================
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2005 10:03:03 UTC