On 6/11/07, Tim Newsom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Interesting... Web services... I wonder if that makes it possible to export the web service off the phone To a program running somewhere else... Or if its limited to some local channel.
I think these services are available within the Safari context on the iPhone, there is no talk of having them be exportable directly. However with a javascript application you could post information back to a central web service to do things like location tracking. The public reaction seems to be negative overall, people wanted to be able to port their existing J2ME based apps to the iPhone. There isn't an existing base of mobile apps written in AJAX/Safari because there wasn't a platform until now. I think an interesting focus for the OpenMoko community is to figure out how to get a full AJAX capable browser (FireFox?) to run well enough on the device, and to build similar or identical web service interfaces to the phone functions, so that new AJAX apps written for the iPhone work on OpenMoko as well. Adrian And, anyway.. That only means you would have to wrap it in another,
fully exportable, web service for such integration. --Tim On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:51, Matthew S. Hamrick wrote: > Wow. once again Apple justifies our lead. > > On Jun 11, 2007, at 5:54 PM, adrian cockcroft wrote: > >> Also, Apple's announcement today about iPhone development using AJAX >> and exposing internal phone functions as web services to the iPhone's >> safari browser is tipping everything in the same direction. >> >> Cheers Adrian >> >> On 6/11/07, Matthew S. Hamrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Yeah... we're thinking that we were going to totally separate the >>> model and domain processing from the view/controller part of the >>> application. That way we could have a couple different HTML >>> interfaces as well as a SVG/ECMAScript interface. I'm not terribly >>> familiar with XAML or XUL, but I understand that most (if not all) of >>> the Firefox / Mozilla / Navigator interface was written in XUL. >>> >>> This is one of the benefits to this approach, IMHO. Separating the >>> interface allows us to experiment with a number of different >>> interface technologies. And the only thing the experimenters need to >>> know is the semantics and syntax of the XML interface. >>> >>> -Cheers! >>> -Matt H. >>> >>> On Jun 11, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Tim Newsom wrote: >>> >>>> If we are heading in the direction of web interfaces, I think we >>>> should look at XAML or XUL or something similar.From what I can >>>> tell, they will be adding silverlight support to mono, so using >>>> XAML will be possible.This also separates the code for >>>> functionality from the interface and can allow skinning of the >>>> entire application interface set. >>>> >>>> This will abstract you from every widget set.Each action could be >>>> exported and called from the UI without needing to worry about all >>>> that. >>>> >>>> At least, that's my take on it currently. >>>> >>>> --Tim >>>> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 8:44, Florent THIERY wrote: >>>>> Here's a little look-and-feel example that could be done with an >>>>> opensource AJAX framework [javascript required]: >>>>> >>>>> http://demo.qooxdoo.org/current/showcase >>>>> >>>>> This may allow easier separation between apps and GUIs. Of course, as >>>>> usual we have no idea how well such an app would perform (little & >>>>> gratuitous prediction: very bad), benchmarking is needed but ... who >>>>> knows ? >>>>> >>>>> This is going along with the ongoings gdk webkit port and gsmd >>>>> XmlHttpRequest interface (was topic: embedded webserver). >>>>> >>>>> What do you think ? Is it REALLY unrealistic ? Could anybody try the >>>>> url on it's Nokia N770 (lots of happy owners here, right?) and rough >>>>> feedback the responsiveness ? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Florent
_______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
