Re: The Physical Web

I have a physical web prototype kit and I’ve been playing around with it a bit and thinking how BLE “URI beacons” could be used in web scenarios. This feels like the territory of the Web of Things Interest Group, but right now I feel like the “architecture” envisioned by the “Physical Web” framework is orthogonal to the thinking of the WoT IG.

I can bring along some physical web BLE beacons to the f2f.

Possibly of more interest is the idea of “smart” beacons (enabled via the Intel Edison controller boards that are shipping with kits) that could enable the beacons to do more than just broadcast a static URL (for example, they could encode data into the URL based on the output of a sensor).

Dan

> On 7 Apr 2015, at 12:03, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, 2015-04-07 15:14 +1000:
>> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/B64BB016-B70E-4AFA-B6C3-E55EEE3EADFE@mnot.net>
>> 
>> Andrew Betts showed this to me when he was in town a few weeks ago:
>>  https://github.com/google/physical-web
>>  http://google.github.io/uribeacon/
>> 
>> Looks interesting, and hitting about the right point; more usable than (for example) QR codes, if it’s done right.
>> 
>> Domenic / Alex, do you know the folks inside G doing this? Would be interesting to think/talk about some of the problems they identify in the Technical Overview.
>> 
>> In particular, I wonder if they should be using link relations to cut down on their metadata issue.
>> 
>> Tangentially - people in the IETF have been talking about putting URLs into DNS...
> 
> Scott Jensen could give some insight into that Technical Overview doc.
> 
>  https://mobile.twitter.com/scottjenson
> 
> He might even be able to send over some actual Physical Web Bluetooth LE
> beacons for TAG members to take a look at and try out at the f2f. Or since
> I’ll be at the f2f, I have few myself that I could bring along.
> 
>  —Mike
> 
> --
> Michael[tm] Smith https://people.w3.org/mike