Re: STK DisplayText changes proposal

[Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2391 bytes --]

Hi Andrew,

On 11/23/2010 10:55 AM, Andrzej Zaborowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 23 November 2010 17:05, Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/23/2010 09:33 AM, Lucas, GuillaumeX wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> According to the 3GPP specifications there is some missing points in the SATK DisplayText implementation and I want to propose some API changes here.
>>>
>>> 1. clear message after delay / wait for user to clear flag
>>>
>>> This flag corresponds to the bit 8 of the command qualifier (see ETSI TS 102 223) and indicates how the message should be cleared by the UI.
>>> In the STK agent documentation it's indicated that this flag is handled using different timeout value for the Agent DisplayText method call. But that doesn't seem the case in the code: there is no check of the flag.
>>
>> Andrew has to answer this one, it seems like there's a disconnect
>> between the implementation and the docs.  Probably just a bug.
> 
> It was in my first proposal, however the decision made here on the
> list or on IRC (I don't remember) was to remove all the details from
> the specification until there's a specific use case for them from UI
> authors.  The current API is greatly simplified compared to TS 102.223
> on the basis that some of the parameters are never used by SIM
> manufacturers.  This includes for example the "help available"
> information in the commands, the return values like "help requested",
> "icon could not be displayed", "screen busy" and many other bits.  On

The help stuff is fully pointless, so we definitely won't be supporting
that one.

> one hand this makes sense but on the other I don't see it as a huge
> saving as long a we design the API in such a way that the unneeded
> call parameters or return values can be ignored by the UI writer.  I
> have to point out that you were the advocate for simplifying the API
> to the minimum level needed to implement the iPhone STK app :)

Oh I still am ;)

> 
> As for the clear after delay flag, there's a check for it in
> display_text_cb (line 1248).  As far as I can make out the only
> difference is the response sent to the SIM.

So it has been a long time since those discussions, but it does seem to
me that using a higher timeout in the case of 'wait_for_user' flag seems
like a good idea.  Do you remember why we left this out?

Regards,
-Denis