Should we ignore NDEFMessage.serialNumber for NFCWriter::push()?

[DonnaWuDongxia]

An attribute |serialNumber| has been added to NDEFMessage dictionary, and it seems only meaningful to NFCReadingEvent.
According to the the push method in Spec, |serialNumber| in NDEFMessage passed to NFCWriter::push() will be ignored. Should we make a clear statement about this?

[kenchris]

Yes, you cannot write the serialnumber.

[kenchris]

dictionary NDEFMessage {
  DOMString? serialNumber;
  sequence<NDEFRecord> records;
  USVString url;
};

NDEFMessage should be renamed NFCMessage. Maybe it is possible to do

dictionary NDEFMessage {
  sequence<NDEFRecord> records;
  USVString url;
};

dictionary NFCMessage : NDEFMessage {
  DOMString? serialNumber;
}

[DonnaWuDongxia]

Two types of message may make it confusing for developers. As the |serialNumber| is only meaningful to NFCReadingEvent, how about move the this attribute to this event, making the NDEFMessage more clean.
interface NFCReadingEvent : Event {
DOMString serialNumber;
readonly attribute NDEFMessage message;
};

dictionary NDEFMessage {
sequence records;
USVString url;
};

I think |serialNumber| maybe don't need to be nullable because string can be empty.
Is it definite to rename NDEFMessage to NFCMessage?

[zolkis]

The UID is not part of NDEF messages, so I would support moving out the tag specific (low-level) information from NDEF message structure.
We could indeed put it to the read event - however, I wonder whether should we generalize this and define a separate structure/interface for low level tag/adapter info, UID (serial number) being one property in that.

Anyway, at the moment the above proposal looks good to me.