W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2010

[whatwg] Bluetooth

From: Diogo Resende <dresende@thinkdigital.pt>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 14:05:06 +0000
Message-ID: <1291298706.15294.8.camel@nasgul>
What about having the possibility to "use" a device other than a video?
Maybe a specific hardware. I agree about not having a distinction on the
hardware stack being used, but there should be a way for an app to be
able to access an USBx/BT/FW device.

-- 
Diogo


On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 22:16 +1100, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 06:37:09 +0100, Saurabh Jain <saurabh at skjworld.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> We need access to Bluetooth  devices using the Device element.
> >> Without Bluetooth access some of the use cases, specially in the mobile
> >> device domain would not be achievable.
> >
> > I think the question is why does it matter they are connected via Bluetooth?
> > Should we really have a USB/Bluetooh/Firewire/etc. distinction at the web
> > platform level? That seems like a bad thing.
> 
> I agree. The Web developer should not have to worry about how the user
> connects the device to their system. They should just be able to say:
> give me the video (or audio or whatever) data from an appropriate
> device. The type of data matters much more than the way in which it is
> connected.
> 
> Silvia.
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 06:05:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:02 UTC