The WAP Forum has responded to the availability of XHTML by announcing WAP 2.0, which provides support for both XHTML and WML in the WAP protocol stack. This diminishes, but does not eliminate, the presence of the WAP Gateway in the WAP model. In addition, the in-place WAP 1.x architecture can claim to provide significant efficiency advantages over the connection-oriented stack of Figure 1(b).
However, all the other problems with WAP, detailed exhaustively in The WAP Trap and elsewhere, remain. Given the availability of truly open, Internet-mainstream alternatives, there is little remaining role for either the WAP specifications or the WAP Forum. At this point, WAP has become a salvage operation. There are three aspects to this salvage: engineering, business, and psychological.
Before throwing WAP out completely, it behooves us to examine the specifications to determine whether there is anything worthwhile that can be salvaged for incorporation or usage in the open industry models.
The general WAP architecture is shown in Figure 2. This figure is taken directly from the WAP specifications, and all nomenclature, acronyms etc. throughout this section are those of the WAP model. Starting from the bottom of the figure:
Since IP can be assumed to be present at Layer 3, UDP is entirely adequate at Layer 4. Therefore WDP is not needed at all, and can be scrapped completely.
Nevertheless, there may remain some worthwhile elements in WTLS. If the WAP Forum were to bring WTLS into conformity with the Internet mainstream by making patent-free declarations for it, publishing it as an RFC, and subjecting it to open review and maintenance procedures, then it may be worth examining for salvageable components.
Thus every component of the WAP protocol stack is either functionally unnecessary, made irrelevant by an open alternative, or misdesigned; with the possible exceptions of WSP and WTLS, which may have some salvage purpose.
Our analysis of the WAP stack is supported by various other studies which come to conclusions consistent with the above. A good starting point is the article W* Effect Considered Harmful [14], in which author Rohit Khare presents a detailed analysis of WAP, and demonstrates its shortcomings and ultimate non-viability.
A huge amount of money has been sunk into the WAP fiasco - a large number of wireless network operators placed their bets on WAP, and invested heavily. And the WAP infrastructure is now complete; all the pieces are built and in place. The problem is that it falls disastrously short of its expectations; and as a result few people need it, few want it, and few are using it [13]. Apart from empty hype and broken promises, the WAP Forum has little to show for its massive investment.
Under circumstances like this, people may find it difficult to halt the investment Juggernaut. WAP has a huge amount of mass and momentum - it has the mass of its enormous investment costs, and the momentum of its own hype machine. The WAP Forum members may make the mistake of believing that this investment is still worth something. They may make the mistake of believing their own hype.
But WAP is doomed, and its investment costs are now sunk costs. The only thing for the investors to do now is pull the plug on WAP and cut their losses. Continued investment in WAP represents the throwing of good money after bad, and will only result in greater bottom-line losses at the end of the day. The sooner WAP is recognized as a costly failure, the better.
Just about everybody joined the WAP Forum. The WAP Forum membership list is indeed impressive, including virtually every major player in the wireless and telecommunications industry. However, as we now know, this is not a meaningful endorsement of WAP. Rather, it is a testament to herd mentality and bet-hedging.
The arrival of XHTML and LEAP on the scene means that WAP is finished, and the WAP Forum has no significant role to play in the development of the wireless Internet industry. From this point on, the important work will no longer be taking place within closed forums such as WAP.
Given all of this, it is clear that the WAP Forum has little reason for continued existence, other than as a lame-duck organization with responsibilities that do not extend beyond face-saving activities for its members.
