×
Namespaces

Variants
Actions

Archived:SyncML client does not conform to SyncML 1.1 specification for REPLACE operation (Known Issue)

From Nokia Developer Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Archived.pngArchived: This article is archived because it is not considered relevant for third-party developers creating commercial solutions today. If you think this article is still relevant, let us know by adding the template {{ReviewForRemovalFromArchive|user=~~~~|write your reason here}}.

Article Metadata
Compatibility
Platform(s): S60 3rd Edition
S60 3rd Edition (initial release)
Article
Created: User:Technical writer 1 (15 Nov 2007)
Last edited: hamishwillee (19 Jun 2012)

Contents

Overview

When passing a SyncML 1.1 REPLACE command while synchronizing the contacts between the server and the device, the data is not replaced properly in the device.

Description

When replacing contact details of a contact on the server side and then passing a reduced VCard to the device, these details are not replaced properly on the device. This seems to happen every time with the SyncML 1.1 replace command.

This also causes data loss when synchronizing contacts with multiple details of a particular type. For example, if synchronizing a contact with a single mobile number and two home phone numbers and the server modifies one of the home phone numbers, one of the home numbers is duplicated on the device and there is no instance of the other number.

How to reproduce

Complete a slow synchronization with nothing on the phone and nothing on the server side. Now do as follows:

1) Add a contact to the phone

Name: Test Contact

Cell: 021021021

Home: 071071071

Home: 081081081

2) Synchronize the phone.

3) Modify the first home number on the server (change it from 071071071 to 071071073).

4) Re-synchronize the phone to see the effects of the last update on the phone. The result will not be as expected as both home numbers in the contacts will be 081081081.

Solution

Currently there is no workaround for this problem. This problem is expected to be fixed in future firmware releases.

This page was last modified on 19 June 2012, at 10:59.
38 page views in the last 30 days.