RE: [REQ] UAProf suppport
now basically they complain that Kannel does not check the UAProf profile of a device and hence does not recognize that certain mime-types can or can't be accepted by the device. But can the list of acceptable MIME types not be checked against the Accept: MIME headers ? I don't see this as a UAProf activity. Is it the case that not all supported MIME types are listed in the Accept: headers and that the UAProf document holds the definitive list ? yes, I guess UAProf is not only about passing the information. It is also about dealing with it in terms of allowing to modify mime-types to fit the needs of the device. Or am I wrong here? I think that what a gateway is supposed to do with UAProf information is not specified in the WAP standards and is implementation dependent. You could for example, ensure that any images sent back do not exceed that specifications in the UAProf document but this again is an implementation issue.
Re: [REQ] UAProf suppport
Paul Keogh wrote: now basically they complain that Kannel does not check the UAProf profile of a device and hence does not recognize that certain mime-types can or can't be accepted by the device. But can the list of acceptable MIME types not be checked against the Accept: MIME headers ? I don't see this as a UAProf activity. Is it the case that not all supported MIME types are listed in the Accept: headers and that the UAProf document holds the definitive list ? sort of. To be honest I'm also not aware of if 100%. They claimed that Kannel dropped the HTTP response because the HTTP server responded with text/html and *if* Kannel would have supported UAProf it *would* know that the device can do something with it. Something like that. BTW, did you sign the NDA stuff for Open Group? I'd like to have you boarded in the REFPOOL issue. yes, I guess UAProf is not only about passing the information. It is also about dealing with it in terms of allowing to modify mime-types to fit the needs of the device. Or am I wrong here? I think that what a gateway is supposed to do with UAProf information is not specified in the WAP standards and is implementation dependent. agreed. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
Re: [REQ] UAProf suppport
Hi Paul, Paul Keogh schrieb: our REFPOOL tests are doing well. Handset manufacturers claim the lack of UAProf support within Kannel. Is there any more details about these claims - ie. what exactly are they claiming is missing ? now basically they complain that Kannel does not check the UAProf profile of a device and hence does not recognize that certain mime-types can or can't be accepted by the device. Can someone please check if UAProf is a mandatory feature for WAP 1.2.1 (jun)? Is there anyone interested to pick this issue up and work on it? The Profile, Profile-Diff and Profile-Warning HTTP headers are all defined, as is the uaprof content type in WSP 1.2.1. Is the question what the gateway should do with this information, other than pass it on to the HTTP server ? yes, I guess UAProf is not only about passing the information. It is also about dealing with it in terms of allowing to modify mime-types to fit the needs of the device. Or am I wrong here? Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
RE: [REQ] UAProf suppport
our REFPOOL tests are doing well. Handset manufacturers claim the lack of UAProf support within Kannel. Is there any more details about these claims - ie. what exactly are they claiming is missing ? Can someone please check if UAProf is a mandatory feature for WAP 1.2.1 (jun)? Is there anyone interested to pick this issue up and work on it? The Profile, Profile-Diff and Profile-Warning HTTP headers are all defined, as is the uaprof content type in WSP 1.2.1. Is the question what the gateway should do with this information, other than pass it on to the HTTP server ?
Re: [REQ] UAProf suppport
A Ter, 2003-06-17 às 09:22, Stipe Tolj escreveu: Hi list, our REFPOOL tests are doing well. Handset manufacturers claim the lack of UAProf support within Kannel. Can someone please check if UAProf is a mandatory feature for WAP 1.2.1 (jun)? Is there anyone interested to pick this issue up and work on it? I might be interested (*need 36h per day please*) because this is related to my current job. Anyway, I'd appreciate any shortcut that helps me, like wapforum links to documentation and relevant sections and so ;) Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are -- br/
RE: [REQ] UAProf suppport
Bruno wap 1.2.1 specifications link http://www.wapforum.org/what/technical_1_2_1.htm Himalay -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bruno Rodrigues Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 5:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [REQ] UAProf suppport A Ter, 2003-06-17 às 09:22, Stipe Tolj escreveu: Hi list, our REFPOOL tests are doing well. Handset manufacturers claim the lack of UAProf support within Kannel. Can someone please check if UAProf is a mandatory feature for WAP 1.2.1 (jun)? Is there anyone interested to pick this issue up and work on it? I might be interested (*need 36h per day please*) because this is related to my current job. Anyway, I'd appreciate any shortcut that helps me, like wapforum links to documentation and relevant sections and so ;) Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are -- br/
