W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > March 2012

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

From: JOSE MANUEL CANTERA FONSECA <jmcf@tid.es>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:15:44 +0100
To: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-id: <CB8F66CC.266AA%jmcf@tid.es>
-1000


El 21/03/12 05:22, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com"
<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> escribió:

>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.

You are mixing things here. Discovery can be dropped. What do you mean by
architectural approach? The API has been implemented successfully thus how
dare you say that there is a problem with the 'architectural approach' ?
Sorry it seems you should find other excuses perhaps the same you use for
discontinuing Contacts, SMS and the other. At this pace DAP will be the
W3C group with more discontinued work of W3C's history.

>(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.

This has yet to be demonstrated.

>
>
>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.

Disent on our side
>
>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
>
>
>


Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 10:16:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:29 GMT