W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Vibrator API: extract from Navigator

From: João Eiras <joaoe@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 22:37:32 +0100
To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v4licuki2q99of@joaoe>

> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:03 PM, João Eiras <joaoe@opera.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> The vibrator API's WebIDL [1] should not expose the two methods  
>> directly in
>> the navigator object.
>>
>> Instead it should be in a separate interface, so it can be implemented  
>> as a
>> singleton API in the window/navigator object for a mobile device like a
>> phone, or can be implemented on top of the gamepad object whenever the
>> gamepad APIs moves forward, to feed vibration back to the controller.
>>
> On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:45:24 +0100, Justin Lebar <jlebar@mozilla.com>  
> wrote:
>
> As in navigator.vibrator.vibrate()?
>
> I don't understand why this is better than navigator.vibrate().  Why
> can't the gamepad API expose a method which matches
> navigator.vibrate()?
>
> -Justin
>

No.

Having a Vibrator interface, which then Gamepad and Navigator implement,  
hence being reusable.

So we then get navigator.vibrate() and gamepad.vibrate(). Same API, same  
behavior.

The gamepad spec can later refer to the Vibrator interface. The Vibrator  
spec itself does not need to.

Hope I was clearer now.
Received on Monday, 7 November 2011 21:38:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:24 GMT