- From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:22:55 +0000
- To: public-web-bluetooth-log@w3.org
Oh, so it is basically a list of all services you want to use any time
in the future, and which ones are hard requirements. Maybe "optional"
is not the best word then.
so for {filters: [{services: [x, y]}, {services: [i, j]}],
optionalServices: [a, b]},
could there be a device that didn't support say [x, y] or [i, j] but
supports [a]? Or would that be ignored if it didn't also support the
[x, y] or the [i, j] pair?
It kind of feels like the user lists the services that he/she is
requesting permission for, and then also list which ones are hard
requirements - but that you want to avoid listing some twice.
I understand the problem if the optional services are part of each set
of required ones, but always allowing the optional ones doesn't seem
right to me either. Who says that the optional services are less of a
risk?
--
GitHub Notif of comment by kenchris
See
https://github.com/WebBluetoothCG/web-bluetooth/issues/82#issuecomment-85074823
Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 16:23:06 UTC