W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2014

Re: [whatwg] Web API for Health Sensors

From: David (Standards) Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 14:56:17 -0700
Message-id: <01136CFB-5742-4698-B82E-ABA46892D6AE@apple.com>
To: WHAT Working Group <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>

On Oct 10, 2014, at 14:40 , Vincent Scheib <scheib@google.com> wrote:

> W3C Web Bluetooth Community Group
> http://www.w3.org/community/web-bluetooth/
> 
> Use cases & Security model, Explainer, and Specification draft
> https://github.com/WebBluetoothCG/web-bluetooth
> 
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:40 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> Indeed, a Web Bluetooth API would be a great start!

How the browser is connected to the device should be an OS question, not an API one.  The ‘wire’ is not terribly relevant (wifi, bluetooth, usb, ethernet, serial, IEEE488, IBM BiSync…)

Be very careful with anything health-related. It is subject to reams of regulation in many countries.

The question is usefully “can I sense the local gravitational field” not “is there a bluetooth gravity sensor in the vicinity”



>> 
>> Also, we are writing standards here, so standardizing the
>> communication of the data between the devices and UAs would be useful.
>> 
>> Both would probably fall within the work of a device API group like
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/ , where media capture was standardized.
>> 
>> Silvia.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Sangwhan Moon <sangwhan@iki.fi> wrote:
>>> Implementing a abstracted API on top of the browser will only work based
>>> on the
>>> assumption that the protocol that is used to communicate between the
>>> host and
>>> these devices have been standardized. Sadly, I don't think this is the
>>> case.
>>> (Correct me if I am wrong)
>>> 
>>> IMHO what is needed is Bluetooth API that can be used (on top of a sane
>>> permission
>>> model) to communicate with Bluetooth devices, and the user friendly
>>> abstraction should
>>> be built on top of that. Otherwise there is the problem of browser
>>> vendors having to
>>> test and support every single known health band on earth. Pretty
>>> unlikely to happen.
>>> 
>>> Sangwhan
>>> 
>>> Original Message:
>>>> What I'd you're a long way away from any medical help?
>>>> 
>>>> In my mind this is part of the larger drive of the web of things (IoT
>>>> applied to the web) and needs device APIs. This might not be the right
>>>> group to discuss it in though.
>>>> 
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Silvia.
>>>> On 13 Sep 2014 10:53, "Erik Reppen" <erik.reppen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> That's a stronger argument than I would have thought of (and mind you
>> I'm
>>>>> just a lurker without anything in the way of influence so don't let me
>>>>> shoot you down or anything). But audio/video capture is a general
>>>>> media/communication thing.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To me it's like the difference between geolocation and having an API
>> on
>>>>> top of geolocation that tells you how close you are to a hospital.
>> You have
>>>>> the tools for that. Why the desire for a specific API for something
>> that,
>>>>> IMO,  would really benefit more from consideration by subject matter
>>>>> experts and devs within that field than general web technology nerds?
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <
>>>>> silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Browsers have been dealing with private personal data for a while
>> now,
>>>>>> that includes video camera & microphone input, geolocation and more.
>> Health
>>>>>> data isn't so different in that respect. There are mechanisms to
>> deal with
>>>>>> privacy already in the browser. But indeed: a spec would need to
>> consider
>>>>>> such issues.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Silvia.
>>>>>> On 13 Sep 2014 08:42, "delfin" <delfin@segonquart.net> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi All:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Use and transmission of private/personal Health data, as other
>> sensitive personal data, is ruled by law and regional regulations in some
>> -- or in most of the -- developed countries.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please, take this aspect in consideration.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   - I would not recommend to read health data within a browser.
>>>>>>>   - JSON transferred data, as I understood, might be 'seen' by a
>>>>>>>   semi-experienced user with, for example, the web inspector's
>> tools a
>>>>>>>   desktop browser has. Not exactly, but nearly.
>>>>>>>   - Not to mention more sophisticated public methods of to collect
>>>>>>>   this JSON/JSONP data.
>>>>>>>   - One might use an existent API or develop a new one for this
>>>>>>>   purpose. The data of an unknown user is viewable by
>> third-parties.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An standard development should take this scenarios in consideration.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   1. Laws and regulations in countries/govs referring the use and
>>>>>>>   transfer of private/sensitive data.
>>>>>>>   2. Open-sourceness and distribution via a "web" browser.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Best -
>>>>>>> -- Delfin Ramirez
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +34 633 589231
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> delfin@segonquart.net
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> twitter: delfinramirez
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> IRC: segonquart
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Skype: segonquart
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://segonquart.net, http://delfiramirez.info
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Friday, 10 October 2014 22:11:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:24 UTC