Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Untitled 1
Untitled 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Not to be confused with Wireless access point. This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (June 2010) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. See talk page for details. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2011) Wireless Application Protocol (WAP) is a technical standard for accessing information over a mobile wireless network. A WAP browser is a web browser for mobile devices such as mobile phones (called "cellular phones" in some countries) that uses the protocol. Before the introduction of WAP, mobile service providers had limited opportunities to offer interactive data services, but needed interactivity to support Internet and Web applications such as: Email by mobile phone Tracking of stock-market prices Sports results News headlines Music downloads
The Japanese i-mode system offers another major competing wireless data protocol. Content s1 Technic al specific ations 1 . 1 W i r e
l e s s A p p l i c a t i o n E n v i r o n m e n t ( W A E ) 2 History 2 . 1 W A P P u s h
S p i n o f f t e c h n o l o g i e s 4 Criticis m 5 Protoco l design lessons from WAP 6 See also 7 Referen ces 8 Externa l links
7 6 5 4 3
Application layer Presentation layer Session layer Transport layer Network layer Data link layer LLC sublayer MAC sublayer
1 Physical layer This box: view talk edit The WAP standard described a protocol suite allowing the interoperability of WAP equipment and software with different network technologies, such as GSM and IS-95 (also known as CDMA). Wireless Application Environment (WAE) Wireless Session Protocol (WSP) Wireless Transaction Protocol (WTP) WAP protocol suite Wireless Transport Layer Security (WTLS) Wireless Datagram Protocol (WDP) *** Any Wireless Data Network *** The bottom-most protocol in the suite, the WAP Datagram Protocol (WDP), functions as an adaptation layer that makes every data network look a bit like UDP to the upper layers by providing unreliable transport of data with two 16-bit port numbers (origin and destination). All the upper layers view WDP as one and the same protocol, which has several "technical realizations" on top of other "data bearers" such as SMS, USSD, etc. On native IP bearers such as GPRS, UMTS packet-radio service, or PPP on top of a circuit-switched data connection, WDP is in fact exactly UDP. WTLS, an optional layer, provides a public-key cryptography-based security mechanism similar to TLS. WTP provides transaction support (reliable request/response) adapted to the wireless world. WTP supports more effectively than TCP the problem of packet loss, which occurs commonly in 2G wireless technologies in most radio conditions, but is misinterpreted by TCP as network congestion. Finally, one can think of WSP initially as a compressed version of HTTP. This protocol suite allows a terminal to transmit requests that have an HTTP or HTTPS equivalent to a WAP gateway; the gateway translates requests into plain HTTP.
[edit] History
The WAP Forum dates from 1997. It aimed primarily to bring together the various wireless technologies in a standardised protocol.[1] In 2002 the WAP Forum was consolidated[by whom?] (along with many other forums of the industry) into Open Mobile Alliance (OMA]).[2]
expectations when the first handsets became available in 1999.[7][8] This led to the wide usage of sardonic phrases such as "Worthless Application Protocol",[9] "Wait And Pay",[10] and so on. Critics advanced several explanations for the early failure of WAP, possibly[original research?] not realizing that it was a United Kingdom product which had to comply with the laws of European nations. An example is the requirement to utilize an ITU message-type that is specific to the French language with appropriate character conversions being deployed by the WAP message transmit-andreceive software. Between 2003 and 2004 WAP made a stronger resurgence with the introduction of wireless services (such as Vodafone Live!, T-Mobile T-Zones and other easily-accessible services). Operator revenues were generated by transfer of GPRS and UMTS data, which is a different business model than that used by the traditional Web sites and ISPs. According to the Mobile Data Association, WAP traffic in the UK doubled from 2003 to 2004.[11] Today[when?] WAP use has largely disappeared. All modern handsets support full HTML, and do not use any kind of WAP markup. The list of handsets supporting HTML is extensive, and includes all Android handsets, all Blackberry devices, all versions of the iPhone handset, all devices running Windows Phone, and many Nokia handsets. WAP has not been the mainstream technology for web on mobile for a number of years.[citation needed]
[edit] Asia
Unlike in Europe, WAP has seen huge success in Japan. While the largest operator NTT DoCoMo has famously disdained WAP in favor of its in-house system i-mode, rival operators KDDI (au) and SoftBank Mobile (previously Vodafone Japan) have both successfully deployed WAP technology. In particular, J-Phone's Sha-Mail picture mail and Java (JSCL) services[citation needed], as well as (au)'s chakuuta/chakumovie (ringtone song/ringtone movie) services are based on WAP. After being shadowed by the initial success of i-mode, the two smaller Japanese operators have been gaining market share from DoCoMo since Spring 2001.[12]
[edit] USA
The adoption of WAP in the US suffered because many cell phone providers required separate activation and additional fees for data support, and also because telecommunications companies have sought to limit data access to only approved data providers operating under license of the signal carrier. [citation needed] In recognition of the problem, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an order on 31 July 2007 which mandated that licensees of the 22-megahertz wide "Upper 700 MHz C Block" spectrum will have to implement a wireless platform which allows customers, device manufacturers, third-party application developers, and others to use any device or application of their choice when operating on this particular licensed network band.[13][dead link] [14]
[edit] Criticism
Commentators have criticized several aspects of Wireless Markup Language (WML) and WAP. Technical criticisms include: The idiosyncratic WML language: WML cut users off from the conventional HTML Web, leaving only native WAP content and Web-to-WAP proxi-content available to WAP users. However, others argue[who?] that technology at that stage would simply not have been able to give access to anything but custom-designed content which was the sole purpose of WAP and its simple, reduced complexity interface as the citizens of many nations are not connected to the web at the present time and have to use government funded and controlled portals to WAP and similar non-complex services. Under-specification of terminal requirements: The early WAP standards included many optional features and under-specified requirements, which meant that compliant devices would not necessarily interoperate properly. This resulted in great variability in the actual behavior of phones, principally because WAP-service implementers and mobile-phone manufacturers did not[citation needed] obtain a copy of the standards or the correct hardware and the standard software modules. As an example, some phone models would not accept a page more than 1 Kb in size; others would downright crash. The user interface of devices was also underspecified: as an example, accesskeys (e.g., the ability to press '4' to access directly the fourth link in a list) were variously implemented depending on phone models (sometimes with the accesskey number automatically displayed by the browser next to the link, sometimes without it, and sometimes accesskeys were not implemented at all). Constrained user interface capabilities: Terminals with small black-and-white screens and few buttons, like the early WAP terminals, face difficulties in presenting a lot of information to their user, which compounded the other problems: one would have had to be extra careful in designing the user interface on such a resource-constrained device which was the real concept of WAP. Lack of good authoring tools: The problems above might have succumbed in the face of a WML authoring tool that would have allowed content providers to easily publish content that would interoperate flawlessly with many models, adapting the pages presented to the User-Agent type. However, the development kits which existed did not provide such a general capability. Developing for the web was easy: with a text editor and a web browser, anybody could get started, thanks also to the forgiving nature of most desktop browser rendering engines. By contrast, the stringent requirements of the WML specifications, the variability in terminals, and the demands of testing on various wireless terminals, along with the lack of widely available desktop authoring and emulation tools, considerably lengthened the time required to complete most projects. As of 2009, however, with many mobile devices supporting XHTML, and programs such as Adobe Go Live and Dreamweaver offering improved web-authoring tools, it is becoming easier to create content, accessible by many new devices. Lack of user agent profiling tools: It quickly became nearly impossible for web hosts to determine if a request came from a mobile device, or from a larger more capable device. No useful profiling or database of device capabilities were built into the specifications in the unauthorized non-compliant products.[citation needed] Other criticisms address the wireless carriers' particular implementations of WAP: Neglect of content providers: Some wireless carriers had assumed a "build it and they will come" strategy, meaning that they would just provide the transport of data as well as the terminals, and then wait for content providers to publish their services on the Internet and make
their investment in WAP useful. However, content providers received little help or incentive to go through the complicated route of development. Others, notably in Japan (cf. below), had a more thorough dialogue with their content-provider community, which was then replicated in modern, more successful WAP services such as i-mode in Japan or the Gallery service in France. Lack of openness: Many wireless carriers sold their WAP services as "open", in that they allowed users to reach any service expressed in WML and published on the Internet. However, they also made sure that the first page that clients accessed was their own "wireless portal", which they controlled very closely. Some carriers also turned off editing or accessing the address bar in the device's browser. To facilitate users wanting to go off deck, an address bar on a form on a page linked off the hard coded home page page was provided. It makes it easier for carriers to implement filtering of off deck WML sites by URLs or to disable the address bar in the future if the carrier decides to switch all users to a walled garden model. Given the difficulty in typing up fully qualified URLs on a phone keyboard, most users would give up going "off portal" or out of the walled garden; by not letting third parties put their own entries on the operators' wireless portal, some[who?] contend that operators cut themselves off from a valuable opportunity. On the other hand, some operators[which?] argue that their customers would have wanted them to manage the experience and, on such a constrained device, avoid giving access to too many services.[citation needed]
Wireless Internet Protocol Wireless transaction protocol WURFL Wikipedia access via WAP
[edit] References
1. ^ "A brief History of WAP". HCI blog. December 8, 2004. http://inspiredbloggers.blogspot.com/2004/12/brief-history-of-wap_110252445307049372.html. Retrieved August 5, 2011. 2. ^ OMA: Frequently Asked Questions 3. ^ MX Telecom: WAP Push 4. ^ a b c Openwave: WAP Push Technology Overview[dead link] 5. ^ Will Wap's call go unanswered? vnunet.com, 2 June 2000 6. ^ Silicon.com: BT Cellnet rapped over 'misleading' WAP ads Published 3 November 2000, retrieved 17 September 2008 7. ^ http://press.nokia.com/PR/199902/777256_5.html Nokia 7110 Press Release 8. ^ http://www.filibeto.org/mobile/firmware.html Nokia 7110 first public firmware revision date 9. ^ The Globe and Mail: "Survivor's guide to wireless wonkery", 23 September 2005 10. ^ IT Web: "A RIVR runs through it", 14 November 2000 11. ^ Builder.au 2004/08/10: UK WAP usage doubles in 12 months 12. ^ IMCR: NTT DoCoMo Inc.: Leadership Position in Japanese Mobile Market under Threat? Retrieved 17 September 2008 13. ^ U.S. Federal Communications Commission."FCC Revises 700 MHz Rules To Advance Interoperable Public Safety Communications And Promote Wireless Broadband Deployment", July 31, 2007. Accessed October 8, 2007. 14. ^ Alternate link to "FCC Revises 700 MHz Rules To Advance Interoperable Public Safety Communications And Promote Wireless Broadband Deployment" 15. ^ Wired News: Gopher: Underground Technology
This article was originally based on material from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, which is
licensed under the GFDL. Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Wireless_Application_Protocol&oldid=458362070" Categories: Open Mobile Alliance standards Internet protocols OSI protocols Mobile telecommunications standards All articles with dead external links Articles with dead external links from June 2011 Articles with weasel words from June 2010 Articles needing additional references from April 2011 All articles needing additional references Articles needing additional references from November 2010 All pages needing cleanup Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from October 2009 All articles that may contain original research Articles that may contain original research from October 2009 Vague or ambiguous time from August 2011 All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from August 2011 Articles with unsourced statements from May 2011 Articles with dead external links from March 2010 Articles with unsourced statements from October 2009 All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from June 2010 Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2009 All articles containing potentially dated statements Wikipedia articles incorporating text from FOLDOC
Hidden categories:
Personal tools
Namespaces
Article Discussion
Variants
Views
Navigation
Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Toolbox
What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Cite this page
Print/export
Languages
Azrbaycanca Catal esky Dansk Deutsch Eesti Espaol Esperanto Euskara Franais Bahasa Indonesia Italiano Latvieu Lietuvi Lumbaart Magyar Nederlands Norsk (bokml) Piemontis Polski Portugus Simple English Slovenina Slovenina Suomi Svenska Trke Ting Vit
This page was last modified on 31 October 2011 at 21:24. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit