Re: Discovery API proposals: call for comments

On 26/09/11 07:57, N.V.Balaji wrote:
> Instead of providing a URL to access the service as with the 
> getNetworkedServices proposal, the service object directly exposes the 
> interface for accessing the service.
>
> [NVB]: That would mean that the interface JavaScript API should be 
> defined for each service type.  Pl. correct me if I am wrong.  Given 
> the enormity of this task (of defining APIs that can work over 
> multiple protocols and
> implementing them) it is better that we go for a simpler approach, 
> even if it is narrower in scope.

This is an incremental process. We start with existing services and add 
new ones as they are deployed. A simple solution for new services is to 
use a generic interface that passes data as JSON. As one step beyond 
that, I am looking at a means to automatically generate live interfaces 
from JSON declarations, where the interface maps into a JSON RPC call. 
This is all transparent to the web page script developer. In the longer 
term,  I would like to see an ecosystem where third parties provide 
extensions for an increasingly wide range of devices and services. This 
is particularly valuable for services where you need a service specific 
driver, e.g. for many USB devices.  This work is being done by the 
webinos project of which Samsung UK is part.

-- 
  Dave Raggett<dsr@w3.org>  http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett

Received on Monday, 26 September 2011 15:00:12 UTC