Hello, Nobody has W3C into account? (even when they are getting input from Nokia, BONDI, operators, browser developers,...)
http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/ That's the way! 2010/4/18 Nils Faerber <[email protected]>: > Rogers, Rick schrieb: >> Nils, > Hi Rick! > >> BONDI, JIL and WAC (add >> http://www.wholesaleappcommunity.com/docs/whitepaper.pdf to your list) > > Ah, didn't know JIl and WAC yet, thanks ;) > >> all converge around web applications written to HTML5, with extensions >> to support handset features that are beyond HTML5. I don't know of >> anyone working on BONDI for MeeGo, but would be very interested in >> learning anything you come across. I think you're right, it wouldn't be >> that hard - maybe WAC is the place to focus moving forward? I know the > > I had a brief look at all three again, I started with WAC and stumbled > accross an issue - I think... the governance. So I checked that again > with all three. > > What I do not like about WAC is that it is 100% operator focussed and > the name of the project makes IMHO their intention pretty clear > "Wholesale Application" - they are only interested in creating a broad > application market. > > While this is of course one of the valid goals it should not be the only > one. As a developer I miss the "level of invention" here. The governance > of WAC though suggests that selling applications is *the* driving factor > for the project and to the few major players in it: There are a few core > operators that build the board of directors and new (operator) members > can only get a non-voting visitor seat in the board. No mention of other > possibly parties (like vendors or makers) and especially not mention of > third party developers e.g. from the open source. > > This sounds pretty limited - sounds like a pretty narrow minded club to > me so I would personally not like to pursue that road. Also from > technology standpoint it seems to me that they are only up to taking up > existing bits and specify a (sub-)set they want to support in WAC. It > does not seem that they want to actually do much own development. > > JIL is similar, only members are China Mobile, SoftBank Mobile, Verizon > Wireless, and Vodafone, 100% operator driven again. But they are up to > do own development and want to provide an SDK - well... > > In contrast to those two OMTP is a quite larger organisation, current > OMTP members: > http://www.omtp.org/Membership.aspx > and Bondi seems to be pretty open, it is Apache licensed and announced > as an open source project which at least suggests that open source > developers can take some part in it. > > I should probably note that I am not affiliated with OMTP nor Bondi ;) > >> folks at Aplix and ACCESS were involved with the OMTP reference >> implementation of BONDI. > > Yes, since they are LiMo foundation members (as is Wind River) and LiMo > seems to go away from native applications towards Web2.0 someone had to > do the job ;) > >> Rick Rogers >> Wind River > Cheers > nils > > -- > kernel concepts GbR Tel: +49-271-771091-12 > Sieghuetter Hauptweg 48 Fax: +49-271-771091-19 > D-57072 Siegen Mob: +49-176-21024535 > http://www.kernelconcepts.de > _______________________________________________ > MeeGo-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev > -- J. Manrique López de la Fuente http://www.jsmanrique.es _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
