- From: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 10:02:24 -0700
- To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Cc: public-device-apis@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 UTC