-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Anderson [mailto:ray at bango.net]
Sent: 25 July 2005 11:42
To: lconroy; Richard Shockey
Cc: 'enum at ietf.org' ENUM; Tim Moss
Subject: COMMENTS on draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb-01.txt
Here are my top level comments:
The idea here seems to be to provide "clues" about the
services available at an ENUM addressible site so that a
device or user that could make use of those clues could
provide a better service to the end user.
The aims are good, but acfetr careful consideration I believe
that this proposal is wrong in its approach, and also wrong
as an ENUMservice. I recommend the authors get involved in
the Mobile Web Initiative.
http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/
(1) Wrong Approach
The W3C is currently engaged on a Mobile Web Initiative which
is working hard to ensure that web sites can give an improved
experience to mobile users. Currently most web sites are
optimized to big screen users
with a "PC environment (keyboard, distraction level etc.).
There are many
parts to this, not least of which
is that the web site can use information presented by the end
user device (HTTP_ACCEPT among others) to determine how best
to deliver a good experience to users. In addition, the site
can redirect to alternative services that might help, if teh
device has certain characteristics.
Therefore, the idea of tagging a site with different URL's
that are selected between by the client device or the user
should not be necessary, and in fact is more limited because
the hosting site should be able to evolve and adapt its
capabilities much faster than the client device.
There are many reasons why one URL for content promotion /
bookmarking / passing on is a good thing. Thats probably why
the .MOBI TLD met with so much derision, and was rejected by
W3C, 3GPP, and content providers.
(2) Wrong as an ENUM service
If the ENUM service approach (not withstanding the above)
was to be useful, then surely it should be available across
all domains, not just those in e164.arpa, for example in
www.neustar.biz so that devices accessing those domains can
also provide more appropriate URL's depending on the support
for WAP, ME, iMode, xHTML, VoiceXML, Flash, etc. In that
case, the extra "clues" should become a general DNS facility,
otherwise only sites accessed by enum URL's could provide the
ease of use.
In that case I assume there is some other working group that
should look at the proposal.
At 13:09 23/07/2005, lconroy wrote:
Hi Folks,
In case no-one noticed, the mobileweb draft has been updated
to "draft-ra-shin-enum-mobileweb-01.txt".
This draft is covered in section 3.3 of the Agenda.
I would suggest that folk look at the new version BEFORE the ENUM
meeting - the changes are editorial rather than technical,
but given how some
people seem to have interpreted the -00 version so far,
perhaps this one
will clarify things and avoid unnecessary flights of fancy.
I would also advise folk to look at the "modest proposal" draft, but
as it seems vanishingly unlikely that there will be time to
cover that in
the meeting, questions/comments to the list would be appreciated.
all the best,
Lawrence