W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Why aren't most devices virtual web services?

From: Kenton Varda <kenton@google.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:45:44 -0800
Message-ID: <4112ecad1001141045q64c6e88fs29b27603744da949@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ilkka Oksanen <Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com>
Cc: ext Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Ilkka Oksanen <Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com>wrote:

> Robin Berjon wrote:
>> Beyond that, a (secondary) worry is the maturity of paraphernalia
>> such as JSON Schema and JSONpath that we could want to use here. But
>> that's a bridge we can cross any number of ways.
> Date objects in parameters or return values can be especially tricky to
> serialize in virtual web server approach. I'm not sure if for example JSON
> has yet proper support for Dates. Dates will be part of the API at least in
> Calendar.

What's wrong with serializing these as seconds since 1970?

> In general I'm bit worried how much overhead XHR processing can cause to
> developers. Assuming I write a simple script that needs Device APIs just to
> read system's temperature. Are the options to either write a parser myself
> to remove the transport encoding or to rely on some convenience library that
> does the decoding? Both options potentially increase script size
> considerably.

Seems like the thing to do here is to make sure (secure) JSON parsing is
built-in.  But that should be much easier that standardizing any particular
device API, right?

Maybe what we want is to standardize a transformation between Web IDL and
RESTful HTTP services.
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 18:46:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:41 UTC