- From: Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 09:52:45 +0000
- To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Thanks for the comments, people. A couple of thoughts:
1. It seems we're looking at two things here:
1. a way to identify a physical sensor (Johnny-Five uses the pin
address for that, WoT uses URI.)
2. a discovery mechanism for the consumer of the API to locate the
sensor.
It might be that we end up voluntarily conflating the two and
using the description of the sensor as a way to formally identify it
(e.g. `new Sensor.Prox({ direction: "front", position: "top-right",
internal: false })`), but I think making that conceptual distinction
for now makes it easier to reason about the problem (well, at least,
it does for me :).
Thus, using a `Symbol` as identifier, as @davidmarkclements
suggests above, doesn't seem totally inappropriate (for now). Again,
whether we end up actually exposing that to the platform or not is
TBD.
2. Whereas discovery (1.ii above) doesn't seem really critical for
Johnny-Five and/or WoT to instantiate `Sensor` objects (you
respectively know in which pin you've plugged the sensor, or where
given a URL to the remote sensor you're planning to hear from), it's
critical at the Web Platform level as you basically know nothing about
the device you're running on. Thus a system as the one @rwaldron
describes above seems essential.
3. Position in relation to a device (and in particular defining its
natural orientation) has been extensively worked on by @marcoscaceres,
@richtr and @mounirlamouri, notably in [The Screen Orientation
API][1] and [Device Orientation][2] specs. Would be great to be able
to reference their work as much as possible here.
4. Similarly would there be value in stealing some of the positioning
stuff from CSS (e.g. z-index). I think not, but still throwing this
out here.
5. Lastly, I want to make sure we don't go down the slippery slope of
defining an ontology of positioning things in 3D. This is why I like
@rwaldron's proposal so far, though I already know it's insufficient
to describe proximity sensors on the back of a car (there are
generally four of them). Maybe a combination of @rwaldron's
keyword-based proposal combined with some less readable but more
extensible system would work (e.g. nested arrays? <-- I have to thing
about this more) would work?
[1]: https://w3c.github.io/screen-orientation/
[2]:
http://w3c.github.io/deviceorientation/spec-source-orientation.html
--
GitHub Notif of comment by tobie
See https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/26#issuecomment-109560854
Received on Saturday, 6 June 2015 09:52:47 UTC