[aerogear-dev] AeroGear Push Message Format

[Matthias Wessendorf]

TYPO:
==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one iOS variant) +
deviceType:iPadMini  + alias: mwessendorf
or
==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one iOS variant) +
deviceType:iPhone  + alias: mwessendorf





On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:

>
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> When doing selective push query, is there any overlap between mobile
>> variant (which I understand like mobile type which contains certificates)
>> and device type?
>>
>
> MobileVariant (or call it type) is something like "Android", or "iOS".
> deviceTypes would be iPad, iPod, iPhone, iWatch :)  - or "Android Table",
> "Andrpid phone", android what not
>
>
> Sure.... ideally there are several variants:
> - iOS iPhone 5 optimised app in the app store
> - iOS iPhone 4s optimised app in the app store
> - iOS iPhone 3 optimised app in the app store
> - iOS iPad mini optimised app in the app store
> etc :)
>
> But, if there is only one variant, it's totally valid to install an iOS
> application (from the appstore), on an iPad and an iPhone;
>
>
>> Both aimed at defining categories.
>>  Are those categories defined and fixed in the spec or can they be
>> extended?
>>
>
>
> I don't understand categories, here
>
>
>> Can we do a selective push based on mobileType=mobile variant and
>> alias=john at gmail?
>>
>
> deviceType and alias should be possible;
> It should be also possible to combine that with a variant
>
> ==> variant: iOS (since we have only one iOS varaint) +
> deviceType:iPadMini  + alias: mwessendorf
>
> I need to add that to the "Message Format" / spec
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 27 May 2013 23:36, Kris Borchers <kborcher at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Unifying the APIs shouldn't be hard and could probably happen sooner
>>> rather than later, IMO. As far as the client goes, if you send extra info
>>> beyond the version it will just be ignored. Though, it would be better to
>>> not send the extra info to keep payload small. I guess the issue would be
>>> on the SPS side and if it can handle receiving and ignoring the extra info.
>>>
>>> On May 27, 2013, at 14:06, Daniel Passos <daniel at passos.me> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Very nice!
>>> > +1 to discuss later how to "unify" APIs
>>> >
>>> > Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> >> We /could/ (later?) try to unify the API and simply
>>> >> *IGNORE* everything besides the version, when talking
>>> >> to|SimplePush| Variant.
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130528/de8e55bd/attachment.html