[Bug 25203] [gamepad] Connected Attribute appears to serve no purpose if the Gamepad object is a snapshot

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25203

Balazs Kelemen <b.kelemen@samsung.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |b.kelemen@samsung.com

--- Comment #2 from Balazs Kelemen <b.kelemen@samsung.com> ---
We discussed it briefly with Scott, and agreed that it's not clear that the
behavior implemented in Firefox is superior. It does not seem to be very clear
when and how the gamepad object's are supposed to be updated. How Firefox does
that today?

I think a sane approach could be to update it with requestAnimationFrame
frequency, and make sure that it happens before rAF is sent to the page.
Updating it with higher frequency doesn't seem to be useful to me. But than why
live objects are better than a snapshot based api that naturally calls for
being used with a rAF loop? In other worlds (with more buzz), the web platform
already has the primitives to appropriately sync the data, so it's probably
better if we add less magic to the implementation and rely on the user to use
the right primitives.

Ted, could you please point out the reasons you choose the live object model?
I'm not particularly critical to that model, but it would be really useful if
we could get an agreement and implement the same thing.

What's also important is that now we have another player in the club, namely
IE: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/dn743630(v=vs.85).aspx. I did
not try it myself but from their documentation it seems like they implemented
the current version of the spec with snapshots:
 - "getGamepads: Returns an array of gamepad objects that describe the state of
each active gamepad device."
 - "Gamepad object: Gamepad objects describe the state of the buttons and axes
associated with a gamepad device at a given time."

Thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 21:36:07 UTC