From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5782301830444552111==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [RFC] AGPS Support Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:50:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4CD0797A.5070602@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============5782301830444552111== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Sjur, On 11/02/2010 03:36 PM, Sjur Br=C3=A6ndeland wrote: > Hi Denis, > = > Fredric wrote: >> On positioning framework side, XML containers encoding/decoding does not= seem to be yet widely used, while the support of RRC and RRLP framing is c= ommon, thanks to the support of SUPL. >> >> Using XML and 27.007 format would be great as long as long as ofono is n= ot obliged to interpret the XML containers. > = > Denis, is this something you would consider as an option, to transport > both ASN.1 coded RRC / RRLP frames > and XML transparently over the oFono API ? > = The question here is really about what has the best chance of being accepted as 'official' API prefixed with org.ofono. I don't see the binary variant having a chance of being accepted right now. With XML I can see it becoming the official API since it is defined by 27.007. Having said that, both can indeed co-exist side-by-side. What are the possible reasons as to why oFono might need to peek inside the XML? > Regards, > Sjur Regards, -Denis --===============5782301830444552111==--