W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis-log@w3.org > April 2017

Re: [sensors] Find a better name for 'unconnected' state

From: Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2017 09:03:15 +0000
To: public-device-apis-log@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-291087269-1491210194-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Moving this forward, I'd lie us to answer the following questions here:

1. Are those three states a good model internally (for spec editing)? *(y|n)*
2. Do we want to expose state at all? *(y|n|maybe later)*
3. If we want to expose state now, do we expose it as an enum or a boolean "activated" attribute? *(enum|boolean)*
4. If we expose those externally, what do we name those three states?
5. What do we name the start/stop methods? *(start/stop|activate/deactivate|something else)*

GitHub Notification of comment by tobie
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/160#issuecomment-291087269 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 3 April 2017 09:03:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 4 July 2022 12:47:53 UTC