On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 09:47 +0000, Chen, Congwu wrote:
> >I'd prefer not to change this. If there is a need, we could introduce an
> >additional getPeerMimeType() call in SyncSource which
> That's also acceptable..
> >Is the MIME type in the SAN message really needed by a peer? According
> >to the discussions with Synthesis, the usefulness of specifying it is
> >dubious because a) not all possible MIME types ("text/x-my-own-format")
> >can be represented in the binary format used in the SAN message anyway
> >and b) the URI also determines the format.
> >
> This is what I found during testing with the Nokia phone. If MIME type is not
> set (=0),
> the phone will complain "not supported type to sync".
Okay, I see. Let's go for a getPeerMimeType() call then, part of
SyncSource. The backend should provide a fixed string.
SyncSourceSerialize can provide an implementation which maps to
getMimeType().
In the SAN code, check the configured type first before asking the
backend.
--
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly
The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
_______________________________________________
SyncEvolution mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.syncevolution.org/listinfo/syncevolution
