At 16:09 2000-11-08 +0100, you wrote:
>Why change one technical solution (WAP) for another technological solution
>(I-Mode) and give up all those great features of WAP, of which one is for
>example the distinction between presentation logic and data which is
>incorported in the XML based WML?
Also answer on another question on the list:
Well, modularized XHTML will happen eventually anyway, and there is already
a fairly advanced draft for XHTML-basic that in essence replicates cHTML,
although translated to an XML base. This development is mostly done by the
Japanese.
This specification with the underlying bearer being http, will also be the
basis for WAP 2.0 or WAP-NG which is to be specified next summer.
So old WAP will disappear in some time, which in my point of view is a very
good thing. But why not make this change sooner rather than later? Why
should we use an inferior technology in Europe when futuing that is already
here to some extent?
I think the users will be moore than confused and also angry if they first
are being told that GPRS will be the new thing that saves the mobile
Internet and just some moth later the underlying protocol will change
completely. Then it will take probably a year before we will see phones
based on WAP-NG from western manufacturers. That's too late.
So let us have mobile Internet now in the western world! We need the
combination of a packet network, high style/high function colour handsets
and the simplicity and functionality of a CHTML/XHTML browser as I see it,
for this to happen.
And yes, the Japanses are being very smart currently... But I don't think
we can stop them in some areas like handsets. So it's better to join them
there and have their technology with us as soon as possible.
/gustaf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://xped.io | gustaf_at_xpedio.com | t +46 8 674 50 47 | m +46 70 916 4747
[ Did you check the archives? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Wed Nov 8 22:37:55 2000