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

Re: [sensors] Device Proximity (was: Device light and proximity sensor)

From: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:22:43 -0700
Cc: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <70B943FE-FF9B-474B-B665-90BDCC6FF383@mozilla.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>

On May 9, 2012, at 3:19 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> On May 9, 2012, at 14:16 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 9, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Tran, Dzung D wrote:
>>>> So, what I agreed with jonas about was a new event that only fired when there was a transition between near and far. device proximity for something that was more advanced. <insert this new event name here> for something really simple. 
>>> 
>>> What I am afraid of is that browsers going to interpret far versus near differently on the same device. I rather to give the control to the programmer to interpret base on value, min, max.
>> 
>> I'm afraid of the opposite thing. I more trust the people that are closer to the os (or directly interfacing with the hardware) to handle that.  
> 
> The OS knows the sensor's calibration best  it ought to be able to give you near/far events directly. That's how things work on iOS where you get a proximityState boolean when something is close to the device. Android does it more like Doug's proposal.
> 
> If the use case is just detecting proximity then I prefer the iOS approach  the OS will know better, and the developer doesn't need to know more. If we're trying to do a generic distance sensor then we're missing at least a field to indicate multiple sensors triggering (which is not common on phones, but I believe is the norm on cars  yes, we have to get used to thinking about those too I'm afraid :).
> 
> I'm not convinced that we should try to merge the two use cases into a single approach.

So lets just create a new dom event as I suggested.  Near and far are defined by the UA.  Thoughts?
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 22:23:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 22:23:13 GMT