On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Lloyd Hilaiel <[email protected]> wrote:
> What are the tradeoffs of dictating protocol and implementing support at > the os level, vs a JavaScript api and leaving the proto decision up to an > updatable app (plus implementing or promoting an awesome js carddav is lib)? I'm not sure what "at the OS level" means in this context. We ship a contacts app. That app should (somehow) implement carddav. -Ekr > Lloyd > > Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Lloyd Hilaiel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > The difference is, users must have choice. Sure we can support the big > > guys, but we should also make it so little guys can build ffx support in > an > > absolutely seamless manner and directly compete. > > > > This is an area where we can give the market a fighting chance to do one > > thing, do it extremely well, and win the hearts of users away from large > > silos. > > > > Why not contact sync by ffxos apps? (Give the user a choice, feature the > > most popular) > > > > I'm all in favor of giving users a choice, but I'm not sure how > much there is to decide. > > There are standardized technologies for both calendar sync and > contact sync (CalDAV and CardDAV) respectively. As far as > I can tell, both Apple and Google support both. > > https://support.google.com/mail/answer/2753077?hl=en > https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3407527?start=0&tstart=0 > > Assuming that's correct, if we just do CardDAV we should be > mostly done > > -Ekr > > > > > > > > Mark Finkle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > On Sep 3, 2013, at 5:11 AM, Christophe Brocas < > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello > > > > > > > > Sync has always been Firefox oriented and so it put the focus on > > syncing > > > > booksmarks/tabs/passwords informations. > > > > > > > > But with the move to Mobile with FirefoxOS, I think users will first > > want > > > > to > > > > sync their contacts and calendar between their mobile/PC/tablet. > > Because it > > > > is > > > > what first matter on a phone. > > > > > > > > > We should probably provide our own contact sync service eventually, but > > in > > > the spirit of "not building another silo", what about syncing to other > > > contact service providers (Google, Yahoo, Facebook, etc)? > > > > > Maybe we should support third-party contact sync before we build our > own. > > > When we launch support for contact sync, exactly 0 zero users will have > > > pre-existing contacts in the Firefox OS contact syncing service, which > > makes > > > the value prop less compelling. However, I suspect at least some users > > will > > > have pre-existing contacts at these other providers, so supporting > > contact > > > sync with them is a compelling value prop. > > > > I can't help feeling a bit sad about this plan though. We use FirefoxOS > to > > give people a great entry platform to the mobile internet, then we > > introduce them to Google or Facebook and proceed to get them locked into > > those vendors. > > > > I can see the rationale of the plan: If you want Sync, then you must have > > more than just your phone. If you have more than just a phone, you > probably > > already have your data locked into a vendor. > > > > Unless these people, like many others, mistakenly see Sync is a way to > > backup their contacts and other data. > > _______________________________________________ > > Sync-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ Sync-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev
