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

Re: [vibra] Vibration API

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:53:44 +0000
Message-ID: <4EBCF0A8.7020509@w3.org>
To: public-device-apis@w3.org
On 10/11/11 23:23, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Scott Graham<scottmg@google.com>  wrote:
>> 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]).
> This seems reasonable.  One could even have a device which can,
> itself, vibrate (controlled via the navigator interface) and which can
> have gamepads hooked up to it which can vibrate (controlled via the
> gamepad interface).
>> 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)
> Yes, that sort of reference is acceptable.
> ~TJ

It might be better for the gamepad spec to make a normative reference to 
the vibration spec, e.g. the gamepad interface could be defined to 
implement the vibration interface, see:


The vibration spec looks as if it will move quite quickly along the W3C 
REC track, so making such a normative reference shouldn't pose a 
problem, see:


  Dave Raggett<dsr@w3.org>  http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 09:54:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:51 UTC