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

Re: [vibra] Vibration API

From: Scott Graham <scottmg@google.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:12:30 -0800
Message-ID: <CANHK6RagRUdthEjTEafH+Va2LjaDkiFn0+y7bqbUB9gJvOMEVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, ext Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org WG" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, public-webevents@w3.org
Hi device-apis and webevents,

I'm not sure what the correct protocol for this is, but it seems like
the gamepad and vibration APIs ought to be coordinated.

Specifically, the vibration API assumes only one connected vibrator
and thus it's on "navigator" (which seems suitable for phones, etc.)

My initial thought would be that the same Vibration Interface would
also appear on Gamepad, so a connected gamepad would have
.vibrate(time) and .vibrate([pattern]).

As the DAP is set up to handle things related to vibration, could the
vibration spec simply add a reference to the Gamepad spec, and make
the addition of having Gamepad implement Vibration? (as well as
Navigator of course)

Regards,
Scott

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 4:18 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:
> Hi Anssi, All,
>
> On 10/11/11 5:10 AM, ext Anssi Kostiainen wrote:
>>
>> [ cc: public-webevents ]
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Mozilla has done some early prototyping work around vibration API in Gecko
>> [1]. Given that the Device APIs group has "an API to manage vibration" in
>> its Charter [2] I believe it makes sense to look at this topic in this group
>> soonish. For this reason, I added Vibrator API as one of the potential
>> topics for the upcoming TPAC F2F [3].
>>
>> There has been discussion on the public-webevents ML around this [4], and
>> the conclusion seems to be that the Device APIs group could be the home for
>> the potential spec. I could volunteer to be an editor to gets things moving,
>> but I'm also happy to hand over the spec to eager co-editors.
>
> Given an "API to manage vibration" is an explicit deliverable for DAPI, I
> think the conclusion re scope is very clear: vibration API is DAPI's spec.
> If someone in Web Events wants to contribute to this spec, they need to join
> the DAPI WG.
>
>> Chairs - Do you think we could fit a slot for this topic somewhere so that
>> it would work for both the groups?
>
> My recommendation is for DAPI to put this API on its agenda (if so desired)
> and going forward, we set an expectation that DAPI's list
> (public-device-apis) will be used for all related discussions.
>
> Frederick, Robin - agreed?
>
> -AB
>
>>
>> -Anssi
>>
>> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679966
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/DeviceAPICharter
>> [3]
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/wiki/F2F_Agenda_3-4_November_2011,_Santa_Clara_(TPAC)
>> [4]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2011OctDec/0022.html
>
>
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 23:13:09 GMT

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