RE: exploration of non-web intent providers

That's fine, validating the use for legacy devices was the idea. I believe that's an important use case to further develop.

New devices with built-in Web Intents support could have their own access control admin I agree. Still for them, it will be important that access control is easy for device owners to manage. 

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

-----Original Message-----
From: Nilsson, Claes1 [mailto:Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 2:22 AM
To: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; Jean-Claude Dufourd
Cc: Dave Raggett; public-web-intents@w3.org
Subject: RE: exploration of non-web intent providers

Bryan, I think that a Home Gateway could have a role for the use case when we want to support existing UPnP devices. As you say such a gateway could provide a Web Intents Service page that provides discovery and access control to the home's UPnP devices.

However, for Web Intents enabled UPnP devices I do not think that a Home Gateway should be necessary. It seems more in-line with the Web Intents philosophy to solve access control as part of each Service's implementation.

Claes  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L [mailto:bs3131@att.com]
> Sent: den 23 april 2012 19:15
> To: Nilsson, Claes1; Jean-Claude Dufourd
> Cc: Dave Raggett; public-web-intents@w3.org
> Subject: RE: exploration of non-web intent providers
> 
> Claes,
> 
> Where does it fall in these use cases if I have a Home Gateway that
> acts as a discovery service for UPnP devices, and advertises them via a
> home media service page using Web Intents to browser users in the home
> environment? Such a gateway could also address the issues I have raised
> with access control to UPnP devices (I want to ensure that visitors to
> the home have access to certain content and types of UPnP services, and
> perhaps not other content or services... thus I need to build in some
> access control features).
> 
> Thanks,
> Bryan Sullivan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nilsson, Claes1 [mailto:Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 9:11 AM
> To: Jean-Claude Dufourd
> Cc: Dave Raggett; public-web-intents@w3.org
> Subject: RE: exploration of non-web intent providers
> 
> Hi Jean-Claude,
> 
> That is correct. This approach is forward-looking and targets local
> network devices ("device 2") that are Web Intents enabled. In order to
> fully leverage the strength of the Web Intents concept I think that the
> local network devices have to be Web Intents enabled. So this is what
> we currently are focusing on.
> 
> Support for existing UPnP (or other local network) devices is another
> use case. There are possible solutions for this but I think it will
> more difficult to really use the benefits of the Web Intents concept
> for existing UPnP devices. One option is to make the Client page aware
> of UPnP and the communication protocol with the Service as I describe
> in slide 16 - 20 in
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/f/fa/W3C_Web_Intents_-
> _Local_Service_Discovery.pdf. This is possible but we loses the basic
> idea with Web Intents, i.e. allowing a Client web application
> requesting an Action be performed by a user selected Service and not
> know in advance which Service the user selects and the specific
> discovery/communication mechanism of different Services capable of
> fulfilling the requested Action.
> 
> So when we talk about Web Intents for local network Services we must be
> clear on which use case we assume.
> 
> Best regards
>   Claes
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jean-Claude Dufourd [mailto:jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-
> > paristech.fr]
> > Sent: den 23 april 2012 16:40
> > To: Nilsson, Claes1
> > Cc: Dave Raggett; public-web-intents@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: exploration of non-web intent providers
> >
> > On 23/4/12 14:00 , Nilsson, Claes1 wrote:
> > > We are prototyping Web Intents for Services in UPnP devices, i.e.
> > > "device 2" in the context of this discussion, and have chosen to
> > > expose the Service as web page that could be visible or "hidden".
> > > Device 2 contains:
> > > - A web server
> > > - Service page
> > > - UPnP description document containing the registration markup
> > > according to
> > > http://www.w3.org/wiki/images/f/fa/W3C_Web_Intents_-
> > _Local_Service_Discovery.pdf
> > JCD: This does not work for me as I want to test the use of web
> intents
> > together with unmodified UPnP services.
> > Your services, Claes, are using a UPnP "private" extension.
> > I do not see manufacturers of existing UPnP devices being happy with
> > the
> > requirement to implement this extension before their device can be
> used
> > together with Web Intents...
> > Best regards
> > JC
> >
> > --
> > JC Dufourd
> > Directeur d'Etudes/Professor
> > Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group
> > Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing
> > Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France
> > Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 04:55:03 UTC