Dave Aronson (davearonson@bigfoot.com)
Mon, 26 Mar 2001 11:30:35 -0500
Eric Burger wrote:
> In Minneapolis at the vpim work group meeting, we discussed whether there
> is really a SMS context. If, by SMS, we focus on the transport, there is
> not really a SMS context. This is because most modern Internet mail-SMS
> gateways do a good enough job preserving header semantics and packetizing
> messages to fit into the 160 character limit of SMS.
>
> However, if we focus on the "urgency" aspect, there may be something we
> want to capture.
But there's already a Priority header line, plus an SMS message is not
*necessarily* urgent. (See the "Good cheese!" ad.) I don't see the SMS
context as being sufficiently distinct from a pure text email that happens
to be brief and possibly urgent, to warrant special handling.
BTW, I will probably be dropping off this list soon. I am awaiting papers
outlining an offer I intend to accept, and that job has zero to do with any
kind of voice processing. B-( See http://www.cryptek.com for more info. I
might see some of you on assorted TCP/IP, embedded, and security mailing
lists I'll probably be joining soon! B-)
-- Dave Aronson, Sysop of AirNSun free public Fidonet BBS @ +1-703-319-0714 The above opinions are MINE, ALL MINE, but for rent at reasonable rates. I'VE BEEN LAID OFF AGAIN; see http://djajobhunt2001.tripod.com for info.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Mar 26 2001 - 19:26:31 IDT