- From: Jeffrey Yasskin via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 22:34:35 +0000
- To: public-web-nfc@w3.org
I think it makes sense to take the first result from any adapter and resolve the promise with it. In most cases, that would mean option (3), that if any adapter fails to set a watch or publish a message, the overall promise would reject with that adapter's result, but we wouldn't want to wait for a failure past any adapter receiving or successfully pushing a message. With this model, a user with multiple adapters, one of which is broken, may have some trouble figuring out which one to disconnect (although we might be able to help with the rejection message), but I expect that to be less common than a user with multiple working adapters who's confused by which one was picked as the default or by the selection dialog. (And both of these will be much less common than the user with just one adapter, who's the only person developers will actually write code for.) -- GitHub Notif of comment by jyasskin See https://github.com/w3c/web-nfc/issues/67#issuecomment-151304212
Received on Monday, 26 October 2015 22:34:37 UTC