W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [discovery-api] Consolidated comments and questions

From: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:57:42 +0100
Message-ID: <51121B06.8020105@telecom-paristech.fr>
To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Le 5/2/13 15:36 , Rich Tibbett a écrit :
> 3. Use UPnP friendly name as NetworkService.name? From Cathy [8]:
>> [[The NetworkService.name attribute is supposed to be a
>> "human-readable title
>> for the service". Currently, for UPnP, it's defined to be the serviceId,
>> which doesn't fit the intended purpose at all. I would suggest using the
>> device's friendlyName in this attribute if it's intended to be a
>> user-facing
>> property.]]
>> JCD is concerned about fingerprinting [9]. Cathy thinks as long as the
>> information is provided after user consent, it should be ok [10].
>
> The UPnP Friendly Name is only provided at the device-level, not at 
> the individual services level. As such it doesn't seem it would make 
> sense to use that for service naming (10 different services from the 
> same device would each have the same names which is misleading IMO).
>
> It would be great if there were something equivalent to 'friendly 
> name' in the service description file (obtainable via the Service's 
> SCPDURL element). Alas, there is no such thing.
JCD: In my in-progress implementation, I had to concatenate "device 
friendly name" for human readability with "serviceType" for unique 
identification of the service.
The result is long, but otherwise, the system is simply not usable.
Best regards
JC

-- 
JC Dufourd
Directeur d'Etudes/Professor
Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group
Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing
Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France
Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 08:58:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:58 UTC