W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2010

RE: Bugs in SysInfo WebIDL

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 16:23:28 +0200
To: "Tran, Dzung D" <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>
Cc: Max Froumentin <maxfro@opera.com>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1274970208.11479.11.camel@localhost>
Le jeudi 27 mai 2010 à 06:58 -0700, Tran, Dzung D a écrit :
> > * although the syntax of arrays is not formally defined in WebIDL yet, I
> > believe they are supposed to be written
> > attribute DOMString[] foo;
> > rather than
> > attribute DOMString foo[]; 
> > (which is what the spec currently uses)
> 
> Will fix. Is that what the WebIDL specify today?>

As I alluded to, the WebIDL spec doesn't specify it formally yet; but
from what I've read of the discussions around it, and from the little
the spec has currently, I think it's safe to assume that this is the
intended syntax.

> > * Error.PERMISSION_DENIED has a numeric value of 0 — isn't it a bit
> > dangerous to use 0 as a value since it is equivalent to false? The
> > PositionError interface in Geolocation only uses strictly positive
> > Values
> 
> If this is the case then there are several place where numeric values starting at
> 0 will have to start at 1. Is this what this WG agree to do? 

I looked at the other cases in the spec, but from what I could see the
semantics of the other constants with value 0 were compatible with the
semantics of false; for instance:
>     const unsigned short TYPE_UNKNOWN = 0;
TYPE_UNKNOWN seems aligned with false.

PERMISSION_DENIED doesn't seem to fit that pattern since it's one of the
error codes among other error codes.

> > * StorageUnitAttributes.isReadWrite is a boolean - it means it doesn't
> > allow to distinguish read-only from write-only storages? (actually, the
> > description seems to imply that the attribute really means
> > "isNotReadyOnly", but even that is not entirely clear)
> 
> Ok, maybe I will change this to "isWritable"? What do you think?

That works for me, although maybe what we need is a more detailed field
that allows to express readable/writable.

> > * KeyboardAttributes.type and KeyboardAttributes.isHardware don't seem
> > to be orthogonal; a virtual keyword can typically present a full
> > keyboard or just a keypad
> 
> Yes, a virtual keyboard (software keyboard) can be a full keyboard or keypad 
> and the values return would be KeyboardAttributes.type = TYPE_KEYBOARD and 
> KeyboardAttributes.isHardware = false. Is there some thing wrong with this?

OK; I find it a bit awkward, but I can certainly live with it.

Dom
Received on Thursday, 27 May 2010 14:23:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:09 GMT