Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Web Bluetooth Scanning (#333)

> Also the official standard is called Bluetooth Smart, not Low Energy, to my knowledge.

I believe "Smart" was a marketing term which seems to be no longer used.  I also recall that devices that had that mark may have been compatible with both classic and LE.


> What are the user stories? 

There are a few use cases listed in the explainer as well as the spec:
    https://webbluetoothcg.github.io/web-bluetooth/scanning.html

Per the feedback, I will add more user stories that addresses the value of this API.


> Why is having it not going to make users sad?

I don't understand the question.


> Can you articulate some of the possible threats to user privacy that might make users sad? Have the spec been designed such that the threats to user privacy are mitigated?

There is a privacy considerations section the spec:
   https://webbluetoothcg.github.io/web-bluetooth/scanning.html

From an implementation point of view, we are investigating UX around permission granting and believe that we will have an experience that keeps the user informed of a ble scan as well as protect them against random drive by sites trying to do a BLE scan.


> Would it be possible to restrict this to a specific device UUID? Or would that not cover the use-cases?

A web developer can filter out devices they don't care about, but that is an optimization.


> can you update the explainer based on the feedback above and we'll cycle back with you?

Yes, thank you for the feedback.  In the next few days/weeks I hope to update the explainer. I hope my above answer can help allow you to make a bit of progress on the review.





-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/333#issuecomment-460916879