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

RE: Rechartering Device APIs & Policy Working Group

From: Nilsson, Claes1 <Claes1.Nilsson@sonyericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:38:32 +0100
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
CC: "Isberg, Anders" <Anders.Isberg@sonyericsson.com>, "Nord, Christian" <Christian.Nord@sonyericsson.com>, "Svensson, Magnus" <Magnus.Svensson@sonyericsson.com>
Message-ID: <6DFA1B20D858A14488A66D6EEDF26AA34D48857BA0@seldmbx03.corpusers.net>
Hi,

Generally I think that the charter looks good. To me it sounds logical to separate out work on a policy framework from DAP. It is architecturally independent of the APIs and requires another kind of competence than work on APIs.

Another question is the WG's view on "a generic sensor API" that is stated as "Future Work" in the current charter. Some options for sensors are for example:

* Consider it enough with the sensor APIs defined in the System Information API, http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/system-info/#sensors. Adding new, vendor specific, sensors is done through the extensibility method in http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/system-info/#extensibility.


* Create something more generic. See for example http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Oct/0186.html


* Build a sensor discovery/selection mechanism / API on top of Web Introducer, http://web-send.org/


Etc....

DAP has so far concentrated on "easy to use" "hardwired" APIs but the number of sensors, actuators, "things" located in the device, in the proximity of the device or anywhere in the cloud that web applications want to access is increasing. Is this something DAP should address or is this a task for another WG? 

So what do you think? 

Regards
  Claes

P.S. Sorry for not responding to Robin's question on my Web Introducer prototyping at the last DAP call. Actually I did answer but I was on mute, which I didn't discover until it was too late :-) Anyway, I think that my mail talks for itself: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2011Jan/0096.html




> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dominique Hazael-Massieux
> Sent: den 2 februari 2011 15:10
> To: public-device-apis
> Subject: Rechartering Device APIs & Policy Working Group
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The current charter [1] of our Working Group will expire at the end of
> June this year; it is pretty clear that our work will not be done by
> then and thus will need to extend or renew our charter.
> 
> Given that our understanding of the work that needs to be done has
> evolved quite a bit, and also due to the lack of involvement of
> potential implementors of our work in the group, the Chairs and Staff
> Contacts are suggesting that we should try to refine our charter and
> have it reviewed by W3C Advisory Committee.
> 
> To that end, I've been working on a proposed new charter for the group:
> http://www.w3.org/2010/11/DeviceAPICharter.html

> 
> This charter introduces several important changes — which are all up
> for
> discussion.
> 
> The most important change is the removal of the Policy Framework as a
> deliverable of the group. That proposed change is motivated by the
> following reasons:
> * the work has only had limited traction in the group so far,
> * the policy framework is architecturally independent of the APIs,
> while
> its bundling with our work on APIs has been the source of
> misunderstandings from potential implementors.
> 
> To reflect the removal of the said framework, we're proposing to rename
> the group to "Device APIs Working Group" — although the group would
> still be referred as DAP since that's now a well-known moniker.
> 
> The removal of the Policy Framework doesn't mean that the group would
> stop working on security. On the contrary, the new charter puts a
> strong
> emphasis on the needs surrounding security and privacy (privacy which
> was actually missing from the previous charter.) We've already received
> feedback that the current wording around security isn't satisfying and
> welcome proposed changes to the text.
> 
> Finally, the new charter tightens the scope of our APIs to reflect the
> ones we've actually been working on — the very broad scope of our
> current charter has been an explicit showstopper for some W3C Members
> to
> join the group.
> 
> You can see a diff between the two versions of the charter at:
> http://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2009%

> 2F05%2FDeviceAPICharter&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2010%2F11%
> 2FDeviceAPICharter.html
> 
> We very much welcome feedback and suggestions on this new charter,
> which
> will also be discussed during our F2F in Seoul.
> 
> Dom
> 
> 1. http://www.w3.org/2009/05/DeviceAPICharter

> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 3 February 2011 14:39:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:16 GMT