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

Re: [battery] Still some questions on battery status

From: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:37:19 +0300
Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org WG" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <80A9F9E1-A797-42CB-BAFF-C58DCA5F0C26@nokia.com>
To: Chan Cathy (Nokia-CIC/Boston) <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>

On 12.9.2011, at 21.56, Chan Cathy (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:

> A couple additional comments on the table for the attribute values
> 1. The rows for critical/low have different meaning from that for ok: for
> critical, it is to be interpreted as {isPlugged is false AND level <
> critical_threshold}, whereas for ok, it is to be interpreted as {isPlugged
> is true OR level > low_threshold}. To keep this table format, we need two
> separate rows for ok, one for {isPlugged is false and level > low_threshold}
> and another for {isPlugged is true} (with any value of level).
> 2. The boundary cases of level=critical_threshold and level=low_threshold
> are missing. My bad for the oversight in the first place.

I've updated the spec as you suggest. Please take a look and let me know if I interpreted your comments correctly.

Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2011 11:38:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:50 UTC