Re: CfC to change Sensor approach, not progress current draft

+1

----- Original Message -----
From: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com [mailto:Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 12:22 AM
To: public-device-apis@w3.org <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Cc: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Subject: CfC to change Sensor approach, not progress current draft

All:

During the DAP Shenzhen F2F on 21 March 2012 we reviewed the status of the Sensor API work, including the current draft, which currently has no official standing [1].

Members of the group at the meeting expressed concerns with the architectural approach of this document, with the number of  sensors in one document and inclusion of discovery as part of the draft, given that  WebIntents could be used for discovery. (An example was presented how temperature could be obtained from a sensor or a web weather service, and this could be transparent using the WebIntents approach, offering a benefit.)

Privacy and security threat analysis might vary with the type of sensor, arguing for the need to analyze different sensors independently, making sure each has the appropriate approach. 

Thus the sense of the meeting participants is that the Working Group should discontinue work on the current Sensor API draft and instead review sensors independently and consider alternative approaches.

This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to formally discontinue work on the current Sensor API draft, to consider using WebIntents for sensor discovery, and to continue work on sensors in general, producing specifications specific to sensors as appropriate.

Where CfCs are concerned, silence is considered to be assent, but positive support is preferred (even if simply with a +1).

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
Co-Chair, W3C DAP Working Group

[1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/sensor-api/Overview.html




---------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 07:56:44 UTC