Re: Mapping WebIntents to Network Service Discovery API

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Clarke Stevens <C.Stevens@cablelabs.com> wrote:
> I'm attempting to map the existing Network Service Discovery API
> (previously introduced to the DAP WG) to a WebIntents model. The existing
> API is here:
>
> http://people.opera.com/richt/release/specs/discovery/Overview.html
>
> This API is very simple (one method) and only implements discovery.
> Communication with discovered devices is out of scope. In prototypes, we
> have implemented communication with XHR (with cross-origin restrictions
> relaxed for white-listed devices).
>
> I think the mapping is fairly straightforward with one exception. For some
> protocols (e.g. UPnP) it is necessary to support device-initiated events.
>
> Since I think this same requirement would exist for other frequently used
> WebIntents examples (like printing documents), I think there must be a
> common solution, but I'm having trouble finding one.
>
> Here's a scenario that has probably already been explored that illustrates
> my question:
>
> 1) The client wishes to print a document.
> 2) The client requests a "print" WebIntent with the document as the data.
> 3) A handful of printers that can handle the "print" WebIntent respond.
> 4) The client selects a printer to handle the print request.
> 5) Printing begins.
> 6) The printer runs out of paper before the document is completely
> finished.
> 7) The client is notified that the printer is out of paper *** This is the
> step I don't understand how to do with WebIntents ***

Since there is no backround disposition, the service must display some
UI for the duration of the intent handling; this is where the service
(the printer driver I imagine) notifies the user the printer is out of
paper.

> 8) The user adds paper to the printer.
> 9) The print job is completed.
>
> If someone could explain how WebIntents would implement this scenario
> (especially step 7), that would be extremely helpful. If there are
> existing documented examples you can reference that would be even better.
>
> Thanks,
> -Clarke
>
>

Received on Friday, 6 January 2012 23:44:52 UTC