Talk:Wireless Application Protocol
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This talk has been copied from Wireless Application Protocol
Contents |
[edit] WAP Cleanup
I intend to clean up WAP and WAP associated pages, but don't let that deter you from having a go.
Before starting I have revised the titles structure. Because most of the WAP links in Wiki have WAP in the text but redirect to Wireless Application Protocol, WAP, is considered to be the handle that most people have on the subject, as in: I have a WAP phone not I have a Wireless Application Protocol phone. This discussion has a useful historical record on the subject so I have placed it verbatim in Talk:WAP to preserve it. Ex nihil 03:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge with Wap site
Merge. The information in Wap site is very modest and it adds nothing by having it separate. While we are at it I would suggest that Wireless Application Protocol be renamed WAP and redirect the other way around. Everyone is familiar with WAP, I've got a WAP 'phone not a wireles application protocol 'phone. You know what TNT is, would you know what tri-nitro-toluene is? Ex nihil 07:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- the wap site article no longer contains unique information not included,or better handled in wireless application protocol so it is now diverted to there. Ex nihil 09:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I think the following is POV, I've copied it across from the GSM article and then decided to put it in the talk here:
Application developers creating a new mobile IP based protocol can
- do the same (not recommended), or
- implement a TCP proxy relay service for the wireless link, or
- utilise the experimental TCP extensions such as Selective ACK that allow TCP to operate better in the presence of non-congestion packet loss, or
- use a new protocol such as SCTP.
somehow I, personally, agree with some of the ideas behind this, but it should be attributed somewhere and balanced by an explanation of why the design choices were made. Historical information about the availability of protocol numbers may be important here.
I suspect that many people, like me, come to this page hoping for help with WAP access to Wikipedia. A while ago I managed to create a WML page that gives a crude interface to Wikipedia, via Google's WML proxy. More details are available on my user page. Could something like this be added to the article, or somewhere else in Wikipedia? – Lee J Haywood 19:49, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
See top of Request for Comments for a similar case. Yaron 21:24, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)
- Excellent idea, but I think it would be better to put it in a separate page and then simply create a link to it at the top of the WAP article something like the following (the page name is just from my head, there should be some proper convention for it however. I just don't know what it is).
- This is an article about the Wireless Application Protocol. For details of how to access Wikipedia see Wikipedia:WAP access.
- Mozzerati 07:48, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)
[edit] Please fix troll in links...
There is a trolling link in the External links section (Wap 1 and 2 compared) The admins should fix this.
Why don't you?
[edit] WAP 2.0
Isn't WAP 2.0 released and isn't it follows XHTML-MP [1]?
yes, wap 2.0 needs to be more clearly defined. - exactly how it differs from xhtml
[edit] Commercial Success
A great deal of e-commerce goes over the wap gateway. This article seems seems to be suggesting that WAP might be a failure, which is pretty silly this day and age. Mathiastck 20:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
The article has a Possible failure and a Possible success section. If you read them together, they seem to indicate some kind of success despite technical and political weaknesses. Surely that doesn't contradict your claims? JöG 07:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] removed vandalism
Vandalism removed from this article.
