Re: [web-bluetooth] optionalServices is not very clear

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