W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-bluetooth@w3.org > August 2014

Re: Notes from meeting between Chrome and Mozilla folks

From: Vincent Scheib <scheib@google.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:58:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK-EfXkbFzogeHFosXkEud2-CRgud4aLcB1D++=azUSy5+3_2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Cc: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@google.com>, public-web-bluetooth <public-web-bluetooth@w3.org>
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On August 7, 2014 at 2:28:44 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin (jyasskin@google.com)
> wrote:
> > Note that not all UUIDs that devices use are defined by the Bluetooth
> > standard. The reason they use UUIDs at all is so individual vendors
> > can define their own, and I'd like to allow those vendors to write
> > web sites to interact with their devices.
> >
> > Do you think this extensibility is a good goal?
>
> Yes, but not one we should cover right now. [...]
>
> In other words, it should be impossible for the API to know exactly what
> device it's talking to - all it can know that it's talking to something
> claiming to be a [device type] (i.e., as in X is a Heart Rate Monitor - so
> provides some common protocol for communication with that type of device).
>

The way to communicate succinctly what to communicate with is the service
UUID https://developer.bluetooth.org/gatt/services/Pages/ServicesHome.aspx
Otherwise one would fall to some type of 'duck typing' of specifying the
characteristics the app required and having a search done by the browser to
find services provided on available devices that match that schema. But
service UUIDs are designed to efficiently solve that.
Received on Friday, 8 August 2014 17:59:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:38:27 UTC