RE: REST: DAP Web Server to access to local resources

Claes,

The proposal looks good. The role of the "manager" as I understand it is
equivalent to the web runtime's collective roles of policy
info/decision/enforcement point in the BONDI architecture. This is also
what I pointed out in response to Richard's proposal, i.e. re the
OpenProvider Container, which I think has the same role as the manager
in your diagrams.

The question I have for Powerbox is whether the authors intend it to be
sufficiently context-aware, so that it can act in this policy role.

Thanks, 
Bryan Sullivan | AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Nilsson, Claes1
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 8:56 AM
To: 'Robin Berjon'
Cc: 'public-device-apis@w3.org'; Apelqvist, Johan
Subject: RE: REST: DAP Web Server to access to local resources 

Hi Again,

I tried to attach the presentation as a pdf but it didn't get out on the
DAP list. So I posted it to the W3C general archive instead (thanks for
your advice Dom). Here is the link:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Mar/att-0004/SEMC_-_
Local_REST_APIs.pdf

Here is the text from my original mail again:

Based on research and prototyping by a colleague at SEMC  I submit a
proposal for how API access control through "user authorization" and/or
"pre-arranged trust" through a policy framework can fit into a REST
based architecture.

This work has been done independently of the "Powerbox" proposal but
currently I do not see any contradictions with the Google proposal.

Best regards
  Claes

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@robineko.com]
> Sent: onsdag den 24 februari 2010 17:39
> To: Nilsson, Claes1
> Cc: 'public-device-apis@w3.org'; Apelqvist, Johan
> Subject: Re: REST: DAP Web Server to access to local resources
> 
> Hi Claes,
> 
> On Feb 24, 2010, at 15:37 , Nilsson, Claes1 wrote:
> > I understand that our submission comes too late for a discussion at
> today's phone conference but  hopefully we can have a discussion at
the
> next week's meeting.
> 
> Thanks a lot for submitting this, we will definitely look at it
closely.
> However, I don't want to be too much of a fascist but would you mind
> resending it in a format that we can read more easily (HTML, or
failing
> that PDF)? That would also make it easier for people who read the list
> through the mail archives.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> --
> Robin Berjon
>   robineko - hired gun, higher standards
>   http://robineko.com/
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2010 06:39:10 UTC