[Namaste-dev] Re: SuperPortable User Interface Design Document - posted for Review

Frank Brickle brickle at pobox.com
Fri May 23 09:45:05 PDT 2008

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Michelle <w5nyv at yahoo.com> wrote:

...Nailing the requirements down, reviewing them as widely and as well as we
> can, and then publishing them will make the design and implementation
> defensible, easier, and will greatly help in selling the idea to operators.
> In other words, Jabber isn't mentioned because it's a solution to a set of
> needs (the upcoming implementation document), not an expression of the set
> of needs.

Most certainly. However I think the requirements are understood differently
according to how they're approached from the get-go. The requirements as
outlined in the document are an elementary subset of the capabilities of
more than one existing protocol. If it can be shown that all the
requirements represent a subset of an existing protocol that is already
defined, formalized, and accepted as a standard, then the burden of our
responsibility may shift to accurately implementing the standard.

>  Here are some questions for when we (in the very near future) get to the
> point where we're looking at solutions for the needs we think we know we
> have: What requirement(s) does Jabber satisfy? Are there requirements
> currently in the document that you feel exclude Jabber? Feel free to reverse
> engineer the requirements from Jabber. If we then have any requirements
> collisions or gaps, then we have a bit of really fun work to do.

I may have missed a dusty corner here or there, but I strongly suspect the
answer is, XMPP is a complete solution, and also provides a few areas of
capability not outlined in the requirements yet.

> We may or may not be addressing the same needs as a commercial terrestrial
> PDA, and we may or may not be able to leverage the tools that are out there
> for their project.

Along the same lines, I strongly suspect that the capabilities as outlined
in the draft document could be handled entirely within APRS. We're after
something more, I hope.

> How familiar are you with the alliance tools, like the SDK? It looks fun.
Only cursory acquaintance, from playing with the tools and the virtual
device. It's done in a very manageable way.


The only thing we have to fear is whatever comes along next. -- Austin Cline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://amsat.org/pipermail/namaste-dev/attachments/20080523/852b7ec1/attachment.html

More information about the Namaste-dev mailing list