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

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

From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L <bs3131@att.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:45:16 +0000
To: "'dsr@w3.org'" <dsr@w3.org>, "'Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com'" <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>
CC: "'public-nfc@w3.org'" <public-nfc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <59A39E87EA9F964A836299497B686C350FEB91CD@WABOTH9MSGUSR8D.ITServices.sbc.com>
Dave,

These type of technical dialogs and solutions should be addressed by the members of a WG, so the charter should accomodate that. If Web Intents is useful here that is an option but should not affect the charter scope, as whether it is an adequate option may require more discussion than should take place at this stage.
Bryan Sullivan | AT&T 

----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Raggett [mailto:dsr@w3.org]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 07:19 AM
To: GALINDO Virginie <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>
Cc: public-nfc@w3.org <public-nfc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: draft charter for a W3C NFC working group - gemalto comments

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.

My assumption is that payments would be handled via Web Intents with a
generic payment API between the web app and the payment solution. This
allows the user to select her preferred means of payment and avoids hard
wiring the web app to specific payment solutions.

> 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.

I would like to understand the technical implications in more detail.
Wouldn't it be the case that the web app could use the regular NDEF API
to read NDEF formatted data, whilst the payment specific driver invoked
via Web Intents would use the payment specific protocol?

> - 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).

I understand that LLCP can be used for TCP/IP connections, and as such
could support existing Web APIs for HTTP (XHR), Web Sockets or more
simply HTML MessageChannel. The only requirement is that the
communication channel is bidirectional and reliable in the same sense as
for TCP/IP.

> 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

I would very much like to understand the implications for Web APIs. We
already have implementations based around NDEF and are confident in
developing a standard for that. It would be helpful to know about the
corresponding implementations at the level you describe.

Best regards,
-- 
Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 14:46:34 GMT

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