W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-status@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Battery Status API aligned with Mozilla's implementation

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 19:52:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+c2ei8GabGnbXe=5NjE8_Lxa6407BLSB2ZDnHV6wAD0Eev4aA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Cc: public-device-status@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Anssi Kostiainen
<anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I reworked the Battery Status spec and aligned it with Mozilla's Battery API:
>
>  http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/system-info/battery-status.html
>
> This is a rather significant change compared to the latest Public Working Draft of the spec, so in the process the spec was renamed from "Battery Status Events" to "Battery Status API" which feels like a more descriptive name for the current thing.
>
> The new and shiny Battery Status API includes some additional stuff on top of the Mozilla's current implementation that have been discussed on this list such as the 'remaining' attribute. It also defines defaults to the BatteryManager attributes.
>
> Let's continue iteration based on this spec. I've tagged a one TODO item in the spec, and there are probably plenty of more things to be tightened, so please continue sending your feedback. And let me know if I have forgotten to incorporate some of the existing proposals.
>
> -Anssi
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678694

Doh! I should have read this thread first before finishing reading,
and replying to, the other thread :-)

This looks great!

I'm not fully sold on the chargingState though. What problem are you
trying to solve compared to simply exposing a boolean indicating if
the device is plugged in or not? I agree that .charging might not be
the best name for such a property, but naming seems like an easier
problem to solve.

/ Jonas
Received on Saturday, 22 October 2011 02:53:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 22 October 2011 02:53:31 GMT