Re: Blanket Statements about WAP

[John Evdemon <john.evdemon@xmls.com>]

On 21 Apr 2001, at 14:41, Arved Sandstrom wrote:

> Nobody here is screaming for an enhanced
> markup language so they can do shopping cart apps on cellphones - we are
> entirely satisfied with the functionality subset that WML has right now. It's
> just about right. 

I would agree with that statement.  

IMy concerns regarding WAP are not associated with WML, but the devices, protocols and unreliable networks (here in the States, anyway).  
The WAP Forum has developed a stack of networking protocols that are similar to, but incompatible with, existing protocols.  

> I'm curious as to what the better alternative might be?

The Free Protocols Foundation [1] has published some interesting concerns about WAP.  They also propose an 
alternative known as LEAP [2].  

The XHTML Basic [3] is a W3C Technical Recommendation designed for use on small or portable devices.  WAP 
2.0 plans to provide an upgrade path from WML to XHTML Basic [4].

The Mobile Wireless Internet Forum [5] is designed to simplify roaming between wireless networks using an all-IP 
based infrastructure.

[1] http://www.freeprotocols.org
[2] http://www.freeprotocols.org/LEAP/Manifesto/roadMap/index.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic
[4] http://www1.wapforum.org/tech/terms.asp?doc=WAP-210-WAPArch-20001017-p.pdf
[5] http://www.mwif.org


John Evdemon
CTO
Vitria-XMLSolutions
www.vitria.com
www.xmls.com
www.xedi.org
www.xmltimes.com