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

RE: Device light and proximity sensor

From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L <bs3131@att.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 19:26:15 +0000
To: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
CC: Niklas Widell <niklas.widell@ericsson.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <59A39E87EA9F964A836299497B686C350FEAD22D@WABOTH9MSGUSR8D.ITServices.sbc.com>
Yes, given an implementation I could create a test. But it might take someone with device-level debugging tools to draw accurate data from the CPU and/or battery status. So an OEM or platform vendor would be better to run specific tests on their platform(s). It could also vary by platform, per the implementation approach, so I don't think a limited test sample would be conclusive.

Bryan Sullivan

From: Doug Turner [mailto:dougt@mozilla.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12:21 PM
Cc: Niklas Widell; Robin Berjon; public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org
Subject: Re: Device light and proximity sensor

On May 9, 2012, at 12:18 PM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L wrote:

But in both cases, my main concern is the delivery of superfluous events, which I believe would cost in terms of CPU battery etc (I don't have actual test results to validate that assertion).

This is an important concern, and we should test it to see what energy difference it can make.  Will you be willing to run that experiment?

Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 19:27:21 UTC

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