From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5990831380725128194==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [RFC] doc: Add support for CMAS/EU-Alert Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:29:46 -0600 Message-ID: <4D63F28A.4030902@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============5990831380725128194== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jeeva, On 02/21/2011 11:36 PM, Jeevaka.Badrappan(a)elektrobit.com wrote: > Hi Rajesh, > = > ofono-bounces(a)ofono.org wrote: >> Hi Jeeva, >> >> Is this WarningType really required on the App side ? >> Irrespective of the warning type, the emergency broadcast >> message handling won't change on the apps side (i.e, its >> going to be displayed immediately to the user). This can be >> achieved by the old boolean variable EmergencyAlert only ? >> > = > Its Popup property which is used for displaying the > messages immediately to the user. EmergencyAlert Property > is used to hint whether an emergency indicator(Vibration, emergency > tone) > should be activated. > = > Yes, agree that the WarningType is not really required. = > May be it was there for some reason. This RFC patch just extends > the existing EmergencyType property. Lets just get rid of it then and keep the name EmergencyAlert. Do we want to re-model this using an Agent style API by any chance? Regards, -Denis --===============5990831380725128194==--