Re: The Physical Web

Sergey Konstantinov <twirl@yandex-team.ru>, 2015-04-07 14:10 +0300:
> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/12591428405034@webcorp01e.yandex-team.ru>
> 
> IMHO that's in general very bad idea
> Why on Earth people think that IoT should be discoverable?

That’s hard to answer since the term “IoT” has pretty lost any specific
meaning at all. Or it can mean almost anything somebody chooses it to mean.

You might instead better be asking the question why people think that
physical objects should be discoverable, because that’s actually more what
the project that Mark cited is about.

An even better way to ask it might be why people think it might be useful
to associate physical objects with URLs and to make those URLs discoverable.

> BTW, fresh vulnerability in wind turbines which allows hackers to switch
> a power grid off via standard CSRF attack:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/24/wind_turbine_blown_away_by_csrf_vulnerability/

I think that pretty much has no relation at all to the specific thing—URI
beacons—that Mark brought up for discussion here. Certainly it’s something
that by design is not possible through use of URI beacons.

  —Mike

> 07.04.2015, 08:17, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@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...
> >
> >  Cheers,

-- 
Michael[tm] Smith https://people.w3.org/mike