W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > November 2014

Re: Vibration

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 18:34:58 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78hmJtC+vR8W72ZaT2m8zg8aMZWNeE6Z03OJd5mDsAXqew@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
Cc: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Device APIs Working Group <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Kostiainen, Anssi
<anssi.kostiainen@intel.com> wrote:
> On 09 Oct 2014, at 15:46, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:
>> Is there anything in http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/vibration/ you would
>> have done differently today in terms of the API? We want to add
>> vibration support to the notifications API as part of a general set of
>> behaviors, see https://github.com/whatwg/notifications/issues/22 Was
>> just wondering if the API should be the same or slightly different. In
>> particular overloading long with a sequence of long does not seem
>> great.
>
> We tried to keep the scope as tight as possible and did not add any extras, thus not much to do differently.

Okay.

I was wondering if you could provide the following features.

* A dedicated name for the method argument, so that I can use it
elsewhere. E.g. VibratePattern or some such.
* A standalone algorithm that performs the additional validation
required and normalizes the input.
* A standalone algorithm that performs the actual vibration.

This should make it possible to introduce notifications that vibrate
while reusing the vibration infrastructure the Vibration API
implicitly (hopefully soon explicitly) provides.


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2014 17:35:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:04 UTC