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

Re: Devices as Virtual Web Services

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:36:24 -0500
Message-Id: <EFB3E582-F502-478B-A05A-6134F810260B@nokia.com>
Cc: public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
To: ext Max Froumentin <maxfro@opera.com>
Hi Max,

On Jan 20, 2010, at 12:03 PM, ext Max Froumentin wrote:
> DAP as an API means:
> - It is implemented in the browser code, or a plugin
> - It is simple to use for webapp authors (because it was designed so)
> DAP as a REST service means:
> - more work for webapp authors (and there are thousands more of them
> than browser implementers.)
> - hence, webapp authors will almost be forced to use a framework
> - that framework will probably need to include Comet support
> - we're not sure yet if every feature of DAP is mappable to a REST  
> concept.
> - we're not sure how to solve the URI scheme problem.
> Based on the above, and on the assumption that DAP is meant to be a
> convenience for webapp authors, APIs seem simpler and superior.
> But like John Kemp has said, it's a good thing to keep REST
> implementations in mind when we design the API, since we can expect a
> few of them to be wrappers around REST APIs anyway.
> Whether we should have a REST solution defined on top of the  
> current API
> is something we may want to have a look at, but not a priority to me.

The priorities you state above are consistent with my expectations  
for the DAP WG.

-Art Barstow
Received on Friday, 22 January 2010 13:37:36 UTC

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