- From: Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 09 May 2015 10:15:13 +0000
- To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Various comments in #8 are related to this conversation, notably around the opportunity of being able to fallback from highly specific sensor subclasses (e.g. `BlindSpotProximitySensor`) to more generic ones (e.g. `ProximitySensor`) in case where the specificity of a sensor could only be defined as it sends data. TBH, I'm not sold on why we'd be able to know a sensor is of the `ProximitySensor` type without accessing it but wouldn't be able to know it's more precisely a `BlindSpotProximitySensor` until actually accessing it. @richtr? -- GitHub Notif of comment by tobie See https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/9#issuecomment-100459247
Received on Saturday, 9 May 2015 10:15:14 UTC