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

Re: [vibra] Vibration API

From: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:05:26 +0200
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org WG" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, public-webevents@w3.org
Message-Id: <C67B29B7-7E46-4322-B720-13473EB12C68@nokia.com>
To: Scott Graham <scottmg@google.com>
Hi Scott,

On 14.11.2011, at 13.23, ext Robin Berjon wrote:

>>> 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.
> 
> Acceptable, yes, but I think it would be backwards :) Anssi has recently modified the Vibration API so that the Vibration interface is reusable. It shouldn't IMHO be up to this spec to define every location in which vibration should be used. Instead, I would recommend that the specification defining Gamepad simply reference Vibration and state that "Gamepad implements Vibration".

I refactored the spec a week ago to make it reusable just with this specific case in mind. Please look at the Editor's Draft:

  http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/vibration/

> Would that be agreeable to the Gamepad folks? We're more than happy to coordinate on feedback, use cases, and all so please don't take this as push-back at all  I just feel it would be weird for the Vibration spec to define what happens on Gamepad, whereas it would feel natural for Gamepad to reuse Vibration (especially since it was modified to make that possible).

I'm happy to hear your use cases that may not be served with what we have. But please note that for v1 we've agreed to be rather tight in scope and defer more advanced functionality to v2.

-Anssi
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 13:05:52 GMT

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