W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-nfc@w3.org > May 2012

Re: draft charter for a W3C NFC working group - gemalto comments

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:57:46 +0100
Message-ID: <4FAD1ADA.8030902@w3.org>
To: GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>
CC: "public-nfc@w3.org" <public-nfc@w3.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Hi Virginie,

It would be really valuable to get feedback from browser developers on
this, as we are dependent on them for the implementations. I note that
the existing NFC web APIs include P2P, but not card emulation. The same
is true for Android which supports P2P push of NDEF messages, but not
LLCP, nor card emulation. This is why I omitted both of these in the
initial draft charter.

p.s. I am copying Jonas to see if he can give us the Mozilla perspective.

On 11/05/12 14:22, GALINDO Virginie wrote:
> Dave, and all,
> 
> As gemalto, we welcome the W3C investigation on NFC and have some comments on this draft charter :  
> 
> - by treating only NDEF format, there is a de facto exclusion of payment/transaction applications, as this format is not suitable to such interaction. One of the immediate use case that we see, is the interaction between web pages running in a NFC device and a contactless card which is swapped closed to this device to perform a transaction. This exchange between the device (which is in reader mode) and the contactless card will be held with other data format as NDEF - basically APDU format transported over the contactless interface being compliant with ISO/IEC 14443. 
> 
> - The card emulation mode is excluded from this charter, but the P2P mode is included. The P2P mode is just a combination of reader mode and card emulation mode. I think that there is a mixing of layers in the charter description. If we decide to treat NDEF format, those NDEF can be transmitted to the web application by any mean (card emulation, reader, or P2P modes) and this is not the problem of the web application. To know in which mode it has been received. 
> 
> - On the recent requests related to LLCP, I would recommend that the API deals only with the actual data transported thanks to LLCP, and is not LLCP specific. One of the rationale for that is to tailor a future proof API, which is not specific to the link layer (LLCP in that case). 
>   
> If you wish to make the WG charter consistent with my comments, you may implement the following changes : 
> - Section 2 - scope of the API includes APDU message management
> - Section 3 - card emulation mode exclusion is removed
> 
> Hope this helps. 
> 
> Regards,
> Virginie
> gemalto
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Raggett [mailto:dsr@w3.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 11:22 AM
> To: public-nfc@w3.org
> Subject: draft charter for a W3C NFC working group
> 
> See http://www.w3.org/2012/05/nfc-wg-charter.html
> 
> Your comments are welcomed!
> 


-- 
Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 13:58:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 14 May 2012 22:57:28 GMT