Re: [Evolution-hackers] Re: SyncML

> Sorry for this not being a proper reply, I'm only subscribed to the
> digest on this list.  I just wanted to check in w.r.t. SyncML.  There's
> already some SyncML support in MultiSync,  I
> assume they've made at least some investigation into the legal p.o.v.

	The SyncML supported by Multisync is not SyncML 1.1 compatible at
this time. It appears to be a slightly-modified version of SyncML 1.0, at
least as of the version of Multisync in CVS as of 4 days ago.

> I'd caution against any expectation of implementing it in a reasonable
> timeframe.  The spec is a bear and there are various interoperability
> issues with other implementations too (for instance, my Sony Ericsson
> P800 is quite capable of sending none well formed XML as part of a
> SyncML payload.)

	Also be aware that large portions of the SyncML specification are
patented by the parent company that financially supported it in the
beginning, "Pumasoft". In fact, to our benefit, Pumasoft just recently
lost several additional patents on the use of the technology, which were
denied by the USPTO.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]