Re: [vibration] Update implementation report (#33)

@scheib wrote:

> Yes, there are valid use cases. 

Please understand that I'm not saying there are not. 

> I was just discussing a partner's needs which does use vibration. They established a large business as a web app, and I don't think we should force them away.

I don't think so either. What I'm arguing for is that: 

1. We acknowledge that Vibration API was not the right design - it's too limited and was designed for a bygone era and now obsolete haptic hardware. 
2. We acknowledge that the API is being abused/misused all over the Web, as evidenced by any site from Chrome status page. To the point where it works in maybe 1 or 2 of the 148 sites listed on the Chrome status page, and even then the use is questionable.
3. The basis for this being a Recommendation no longer holds (see implementation report) - so should be Obsoleted or have a different designation.
4. DAS is lacking the appropriate stakeholders to shepherd a new haptic spec.
5. There's little interest in exposing the Vibration API in its current form other engines. 

So, again, I'm not saying let's not do haptics. I'm saying let's do haptics right, but also let's stop "recommending" Vibration as the solution. It's not fit for purpose and it's rife with abuse.  

> While some browsers may choose not to expose the feature I don't personally see the issue with this specification existing in the WG.

Unlike WebApps, the DAS Working Group is not charted to work on haptics. It is not in scope of the working group (so DAS can't work on it, unless they recharter). The working group is only chartered to do small/light maintenance on the Vibration spec, not add new features.

I'm not suggesting the W3C stop working on haptics. On the contrary, I'm suggesting that the work be done with a larger set of stake holders as part of WebApps or the WICG. 

> Marcos, your contributions are so valuable to so many specifications in need of material improvement. When you work on those I'm always grateful.

🥹 ... I appreciate that. And I'm well aware that this is a real low point in the relationship between myself and DAS. 

At the same time, I do want all of us to do better here. All I ask is that we look at the evidence objectively, and, as @egirard did: call me out if I too am not being objective enough and let's dig into the details as appropriate - but please let's put the interest of end users first here. 



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by marcoscaceres
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/vibration/issues/33#issuecomment-2161923133 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config

Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2024 01:46:33 UTC