The Java Community Process(SM) Program - JSRs: Java Specification Requests

Use of JCP site is subject to the JCP Terms of Use and the Oracle Privacy Policy

JSR #187
Instant Messaging
JSR Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2002-05-14 to: 2002-05-28

These are the final results of the JSR Review Ballot for JSR #187. The Executive Committee for ME has approved this ballot.

Votes

BEA Systems

Cisco Systems

Ericsson Inc.

IBM

Insignia Solutions

Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.

Motorola

Nokia Corporation

PalmSource, Inc.

Philips Electronics UK Ltd

Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)

Siemens AG

Sony International (Europe) GmbH

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Texas Instruments Inc.

Zucotto Wireless

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

On 2002-05-28 Siemens AG voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 IBM voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Zucotto Wireless voted Yes with the following comment:
Zucotto supports the implementation of IM protocols and API specifically for the J2ME space but echos the concerns already expressed on co-ordination with the groups developing similar APIs in J2SE (125, 137, 145, 164, 165) as well as with JSRs that may make use of the IM API (118, 120, 180) to avoid unnecessary overlap and duplication. In addition, the unique needs of J2ME devices must be acknowledged.  We also hope the JSR-185 EG will help to sort these issues in the future.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Motorola voted Yes with the following comment:
Motorola supports this JSR but encourages the specification lead to coordinate with the following spec leads to avoid overlapping APIs.
JSR #120 Wireless Messaging API
JSR #164 JAIN SIMPLE Presence
JSR #165 JAIN SIMPLE Instant Messaging
JSR #180 SIP API for J2ME

Perhaps a follow-up presentation by the spec lead to the JSR-185 expert group would be a good step.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Ericsson Inc. voted No with the following comment:
Ericsson want to see clarification of dependancies and overlaps between existing JSRs in similar or related technology areas (e.g. SIP, Presence & IM) in order to achieve some consistency before supporting further JSRs in these areas. We anticipate that the work of the JSR-185 Expert Group will facilitate such consistency.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Texas Instruments Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Research In Motion, LTD (RIM) voted Yes with the following comment:
It remains to be seen how J2SE/J2ME portability will be achieved while maintaining the natural idioms of each Java platform.  The CR spec should be clear in this respect in terms of how portability will be achieved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Sony International (Europe) GmbH voted Yes with the following comment:
<<Sony votes "YES" with the following conditions>>

Expert Group Leader has to clarify the each JSR's positioning for avoiding overlaps( from technical point of view , from marketting point of view et al.) among JSRs and open its clarifications to the Community before kicking-off the Expert Group.

<Reasons>
There are many JSRs connection with JSR 186,187

for example
JSR #118 MIDP 2.0
JSR #120 Wireless Messaging API
JSR #164 JAIN SIMPLE Presence
JSR #165 JAIN SIMPLE Instant Messaging
JSR #180 SIP API for J2ME

Sony think their are somewhat correlated among them. 

If JSR 186,187 started with no clarification of positioning among connected 
JSRs, Java users and market may confuse and it may decrease power of Java.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-28 Nokia Corporation voted Abstain with the following comment:
Comment for both JSR-186 and 187: Even if we in principle support the idea of specifying protocol agnostic IM and Presense APIs for J2ME, we had to abstain at this point since we lack answers and information about the following (please see my previous mail to Spec Lead and the ECs):
- does this proposed Spec comply with CLDC/MIDP environment API architecture or is it a compromise for SE/EE?
- what is the relation of this IM API with the Messaging API (JSR-120)?
- the concept of Presense is very limited in this JSR-186 (when device enters/exits network). This is not our view of presense.
- what is really the functionality in overall that the presense API will offer?
- what is the relation to JSR-164/165 - are so many APIs needed for IM/presense?
- we did not understand why SIP is positioned as only IP-based solution, and others such as WV, AOL etc are not
In general we'd like to see more discussion about the presense functionality of this proposed API.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-24 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
If this JSR is approved by the ME EC for development, Sun hopes to
see close coordination between the JSR's expert group, the handset
manufacturers, and the expert group of JSR-118 (MIDP 2.0), to ensure
that the results of the JSR are suitable for use in the resource
constrained environments of current wireless devices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-24 Insignia Solutions voted Abstain with the following comment:
We are not expert in this area and have no strong opinion on this area.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-17 Cisco Systems voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2002-05-15 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------