Re: [aerogear-dev] AeroGear Push Message Format

On 28 May 2013 08:48, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > 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(a)apache.org&gt;wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt;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@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(a)redhat.com&gt; 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(a)passos.me&gt; 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(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)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 > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >