- From: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 11:15:18 +0200
- To: "Tran, Dzung D" <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>
- Cc: Max Froumentin <maxfro@opera.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Oct 4, 2009, at 17:27 , Tran, Dzung D wrote: >>> - Compass >> >> As in the existence or absence of a Compass device, right? But not >> providing a heading, since that would overlap the geolocation >> specification. >> If that's right, then add: Geolocation device > > Providing access to Geolocation information via the System Info & > Events API is logical, although it would be duplicitous. I think that what Max meant here was that the SIE would expose whether geolocation and compass capabilities are present, not the actual information. > I'm not sure the Geolocation API has in mind the use case where > orientation info comes from a compass rather than being extrapolated > over time from GPS coordinates. If we choose to provide compass data > via the Geolocation API, it should have an orientation Use Case and > an orientation Requirement added, e.g. requirement 6.2.4 should be > modified to read: " The Geolocation API MUST allow an application to > register to receive updates when >>either the position or the > heading<< of the hosting device changes." That's something that would be worth checking with them indeed. I believe we have overlap in membership? Alternatively I can just talk to Angel. -- Robin Berjon robineko — setting new standards http://robineko.com/
Received on Monday, 5 October 2009 09:30:57 UTC