W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Updated draft charter

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:00:53 +0200
To: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>
Cc: "Nilsson, Claes1" <Claes1.Nilsson@sonyericsson.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1302267654.6838.246.camel@altostratustier>
Le vendredi 08 avril 2011 à 11:28 +0200, Rich Tibbett a écrit :
> > I would say:
> > * The possibility for web applications to register themselves as handlers/providers for certain data types
> 
> If we took a strict definition of 'data type' isn't this already covered 
> in [1]?
> 
> > * The possibility for web applications to request access to a handler/provider of a certain data type
> 
> Again, 'data type' seems to be the wrong terminology. It's really best 
> labeled as an intent IMO.

I agree data type might be confusing, but "intent" seems to be too
ill-defined for use in a charter, I would think. Input on a phrasing
that is both clear enough and short enough would be most welcome.


> On another note, I see some potential here for a Discovery API (as added 
> to the charter already) to report service intents supported by other 
> local devices. Then to be able to register those intents in the api 
> proposal above. Then to allow a web page to request access to those 
> services, then establish the full-duplex communication channel provided 
> by Web Send to those devices and communicate according to a specific 
> Service-based API. Effectively, we should aim to make discovery, 
> registration and invocation in to a web tool-chain where one can feed 
> and reuse the other.

Agreed; but does that need any addition to the charter? Or are we fine
with the current list of deliverables?

Dom

> [1] 
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#custom-handlers
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 13:01:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:20 GMT