- From: Yriarte, Luc <luc.yriarte@intel.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 17:46:10 +0000
- To: Don Coleman <dcoleman@chariotsolutions.com>, "public-nfc@w3.org" <public-nfc@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2014 17:46:40 UTC
Definitely agree on a nfc.onmessage API, directly on the NFCManager interface. On the platforms you mention that may be the only easily implementable option. I'd keep the tag / peer distinction as that's relevant for other tasks like formating tags, llcp... Eventually we may end up with a core NFC API limited to NDEF, and extensions for NFC tag and peer to peer. That could be easier to manage from the implementer point of view. From: Don Coleman [mailto:dcoleman@chariotsolutions.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2014 5:31 PM To: public-nfc@w3.org Subject: Do we need Tag and Peer when reading NDEF messages? For incoming messages, do we care if the message came from a peer or a tag? The current Windows and BlackBerry webworks API just give you an NDEF message, they don't indicate a source. Since we're only covering NDEF, the tag is almost irrelevant, unless we want to allow implementers to be able to add tag meta data (id, nfc forum tag type, technology, size, locked/unlocked, writable). Incoming messages could be handled by nfc.onmessage. This could make reading messages much simpler.
Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2014 17:46:40 UTC