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

Re: [vibra] Adding [NoInterfaceObject] to the Vibration interface

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 09:05:54 +0200
Message-ID: <1346915154.3866.104.camel@altostratustier>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, ext Justin Lebar <jlebar@mozilla.com>, 권기홍 Kwon <kihong.kwon@samsung.com>
Le mercredi 05 septembre 2012 à 23:56 -0700, Jonas Sicking a écrit :
> > One reason why having a declared (but invisible) Vibration interface
> > might be useful is that there had been discussions about adding that
> > interface on other interfaces, e.g. to handle vibration on gamepads.
> Couldn't we make that change then if needed? My impression was that
> gamepads were different enough that this might not be possible anyway.
> I.e. they often have multiple vibrators, and almost always the ability
> to set vibration strength.

Sounds reasonable to me (I personally prefer the cleaner partial
interfaces; just wanted to make sure we didn't forget one of the aspects
of this discussion).

Received on Thursday, 6 September 2012 07:06:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:55 UTC