On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:53:05AM +0100, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote: > >> Minor correction: it is not "SyncML the protocol" which limits the kinds > >> of data that can be exchanged, it is "SyncML server XYZ" or "SyncML > >> client ABC" which only support certain kinds of data. > >> > >> > Or are you saying > >> > that the SyncMl "intermediate standard format" is effectively cast in > >> > stone? > >> > >> No, it is not. The implementations choose that, with varying success. > >> > > Both of the above make it even worse to my mind. It means that if I > > have a working system with clients A and B connecting via server S > > then it's quite possible that clients A and B *wont't* work with a > > different server T. In fact, thinking about my experiences so far, > > that is *exactly* what happens. Each combination of client A (my > > Nokia E71), server (eGroupware, myFunambol, a locally installed > > Funambol and ScheduleWorld) and client B (usually evolution) works > > slightly differently and has different foibles. > > I don't think you understand. SyncML is a document format that can be used > by applications providing a certain set of features, like contacts, calendar > data, tasks, notes... However, you should still be allowed to make an > application that only provides contact info, or an application that only > handles tasks. Someone might even want to make an application that > only handles notes! Obviously, the clients and servers choose how they > want to use the document. The document format, however, is versioned so > people know what to expect because that's what SyncML plugins, clients > and servers do. > > Your complaint, is that not all applications understand all other applications > datafiles, and that you cannot connect directly to a data source without > some mechanism to protect the integrity of the data, etc. That's just how > stuff works. Probably won't change, and I certainly hope it never will. > > You've been complaining for days now; I managed to download, install and > configure Funambol, SyncEvolution and Genesis to work with all my PIMs > and all my different mobile phones, from scratch, in less than two hours. > Are you seeing my point? I didn't rush anything, and I don't have the fastest > connection in the world. It really isn't difficult. > I'm not *complaining*, I too have SyncEvolution and Genesis working. I was just surmising that maybe there are other, possibly better, ways to achieve the same result (well, a better result actually). While I have it all working it's far from perfect and this discussion has helped my understand *why* it's not perfect.
> I really feel that the internet would be a better society if people complained > less and fixed more, if people were more interested in learning than they were > in making claims. This discussion has taught me a lot, maybe I play devil's advocate too much but I'm really not simply moaning about things. I'm trying to discuss weaknesses and look at ways to improve - possibly by looking at radically different approaches. I know only too well the programmers mind set (I'm often there) you get sort of tunnel vision and hammer away at the immediate problem without realising that there's a totally different and much better way to achieve the same end. In fact all this discussion has set me off on another track, I don't *actually* use my E71 heavily for calendar and don't very often enter addresses on it. So it seems to me that my solution may not be synchronization at all. I'll find a desktop application I'm happy with, possibly one that will synchronise with something on the web by sharing .ics files and then will update my E71 occasionally from my desktop. -- Chris Green _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
