On Do, 2011-08-04 at 17:42 +0200, Chris Kühl wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote: > > I was working based on the assumption that our look-up table of devices > > and the corresponding entries in the templates will be very small. > > > > Yes this is small currently, but should grow. And I plan on trying to > crowd source this information once the Desktop Summit is over. Of > course as you state below this doesn't mean we know which template > this should be assigned to.
I was trying to grow the list of know and tested devices with the http://syncevolution.org/wiki/phone-compatibility-template template page and the resulting Wiki query for "phone": http://syncevolution.org/taxonomy/term/phone The result has been somewhat mixed. Directly after the initial SyncEvolution 1.0 release, some entries were added, but that stopped soon after. It definitely would be good to advertise that SyncEvolution really works with phones and how to report success/failure. > > Where would we get a full list of product IDs for all Nokia phones ever > > published, for example? And even if we could get such a list, do we add > > all of those names to the Nokia template, without confirmation that it > > really works? As you said, we shouldn't. > > > > So the more realistic outcome is that we have to make decisions based on > > just the vendor name. > > > > Right. This is available without support for the Device Id profile, by > using a portion of the mac address. Do we have and/or need code for that kind of lookup? Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't Device ID profile support wide-spread enough that we can rely on it exclusively find the vendor name? > >> There are 2 things that have to happen for the matching score to be > >> unnecessary. > >> > >> 1) The device needs to be in the look-up table. > >> 2) The template needs to have a fingerprint that matches the product > >> string from the look-up table exactly. If we or the user has added it > >> here then this should be the template to use. > >> > >> If both are not fulfilled then we do as we've been doing. > > > > Okay. In that case the code needs to use the vendor name from the Device > > ID profile instead of the user-assigned device name in the traditional > > fuzzy search. > > > > Ok. Some of the names in the vendor list obtained from the Bluetooth > SIG would not match our fingerprints. For example, Sony Ericsson is > "Ericsson Technology Licensing." SE also has another entry that reads > "Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications." We either need to rename them > to match in the list or in the config templates. I say we change it in > the list. I agree. -- 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
