On Dec 2, 2010, at 6:00 , Diogo Resende wrote: > I don't think Don was talking about mouse/kb/video/gps stuff. That > should be handled by the OS and reflected to the current APIs as wired > alternatives do. I think Don meant to be able to scan other types of > devices and be able to interact with them. > > For example, a medical device may have no interest to the OS but a web > app (just like a desktop app) could get some interesting information and > perhaps send some instructions. Maybe some API like the geolocation.. >
But there is still a whole OS, and a piece of hardware (the bluetooth chip) between the browser and the bluetooth device. If the OS considers the device 'visible' or 'connected' then it's available to the browser. It doesn't matter what the means of connection is. If you're suggesting that we should have ways of browsing what devices/services you *might* connect to (the equivalent of the panels that OSes offer to set up pairing), on Bluetooth (or, I guess, the network), that raises a whole host of questions and issues. So I still think, if the OS thinks you can talk to it (it's paired or connected), the fact that Bluetooth is the 'wire' is irrelevant. If the OS does *not* think it's connected, then you're talking about establishing connectivity through some kind of browser/web-mediated interaction. David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
