W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Device light and proximity sensor

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 17:56:41 +0100
Message-ID: <4FAAA1C9.6040303@w3.org>
To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Its a damp grey day here, so I am obliged to worry that if these
additional parameters vary from one browser/platform to another, we have
created a nice finger print for those nice tracking folks.

On 09/05/12 17:24, Doug Turner wrote:
> Yup.
> 
> On May 9, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Tran, Dzung D wrote:
> 
>> Doug,
>> Your suggestion here is to add them as optional to the callback. So are these readonly and constant throughout the events?
>>  
>> Thanks
>> Dzung Tran
>>  
>> From: Doug Turner [mailto:dougt@mozilla.com] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 8:29 AM
>> To: N.V.Balaji
>> Cc: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; Niklas Widell; Robin Berjon; public-device-apis@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Device light and proximity sensor
>>  
>>  
>> On May 9, 2012, at 8:24 AM, N.V.Balaji wrote:
>>
>>
>> I feel, addition of sensor_granularity and interval parameters can help to solve parts of the problems that you have mentioned. The interval parameter is used in device orientation event specification ([1]) as well. Developers can detect the usefulness of the data based on these two parameters.
>>
>>  
>>  
>> :)  Yup.  Lets add both of those (as options) to the spec.
> 
> 


-- 
Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 16:57:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 16:57:13 GMT