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

Re: Device light and proximity sensor

From: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 10:02:24 -0700
Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Message-Id: <36218CA0-F3F5-43FC-91EF-C8E8BCBB28B0@mozilla.com>
To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Yup.  Suggestions on how to address it?

On May 9, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Dave Raggett wrote:

> 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 17:02:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 17:02:59 GMT