Subject: Re: wireless services

From: "James P. Salsman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 12:24:00 -0700 (PDT)

Aditya,

Thank you for your Internet message:

>... why are you segregating these voice features with web/email/WAP?

I do not understand that question.  My problem stems from the use of 
the verb "segregating" modified by "with" -- those two do not work 
well together.

>... using WAP, we can easily incorporate these features in today's 
> cellular phone....

Great.  Please explain how to use WAP for asynchronous audio messaging. 
I had not been told that the WAP forum had incorporated that yet.  I 
predicted it would take them at least three months longer.  In terms 
of open standards, Dave Raggett designed INPUT TYPE=AUDIO in HTML+ 
forms in 1993.  I wonder what the WML form bytecodes for that are, or 
if they have even been designed within the confines of the WML forum.

>... in WAP we have some thing called the WTAI ( Wireless Telephony 
> Application Interface ) that provides services like auto call back,
> voice mail etc to mobile handset via concept of WTA Server.

Where is WTAI documented?

If WTAI is proprietary, closed, and obscure, as it has been, it will 
have limited market share when compared to open, free, and 
well-documented standards.  Good asynch voice in a portable is just 
as good as quality email on the desktop, and the quality of voice 
browsers will get up there, too.  Likewise, IP will stay as popular 
for its API as it already is, and packet switches with popular 
routing protocols will become typical options for cellular switch 
installations.  Those APIs that allow programs to perform operations 
unpopular with the hardware owners will tend to be discouraged.

Similarly, until voicemail replies are as easy as email replies, the 
full benefits of asyncrhonous voice messaging are unlikely to be 
realized.  I feel it is very likely that the more open a standard is, 
the easier it is to reply to a message sent using that standard.

Many of us have a duty to work towards these optimum conditions.  
There are plenty of ways to make incremental improvements in the 
right direction.  The solutions that appear to have the strongest 
monitary potential in the short term are not as worthwhile as 
those that clearly do have greater strength in the long term.

Cheers,
James
-- 
http://www.bovik.org.