- From: Diogo Resende <dresende@thinkdigital.pt>
- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 15:02:59 +0000
I forgot to mention that maybe only one bluetooth stack is relevant here, the RFCOMM (serial). I think this makes the API more simple and consistent (as USB and firewire are also serial). -- Diogo On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 15:56 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 15:50:07 +0100, Diogo Resende > <dresende at thinkdigital.pt> wrote: > > This is exactly my point (and probably Don). I was not thinking about > > common i/o devices. I was thinking about a way to somehow connect to an > > uncommon device. Maybe something like websockets, maybe devsockets :P > > Heh. > > > > I can see 3 important steps to do this: > > > > - have a way expose diferent devices (so the app can search/list) > > > > - have permission to access a specific device (yes/no/remember) > > (the browser should do the bluetooth pairing stuff) > > These two should be done via <device> I think. Giving blatant access to > external devices from web pages would be quite the security risk. > > > > - talk to the device with some kind of stream/socket > > > > Does anyone think this could be a good idea? > > I certainly think it's cool. :-) > >
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 07:02:59 UTC