W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > October 2009

RE: What does it all hang off of?

From: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 11:59:00 +0200
To: Peter-Paul Koch <pp.koch@gmail.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: "Jere.Kapyaho@nokia.com" <Jere.Kapyaho@nokia.com>, "stewart.brodie@antplc.com" <stewart.brodie@antplc.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FAA1D89C5BAF1142A74AF116630A9F2C2890D48741@OBEEX01.obe.access-company.com>
Hi,

Just some architectural comments:
The hardware is accessed via some device driver.
On top of this we have some OS and middleware.
Then on top of them we have some application with UI/GUI.
In DAP we basically think of replacing the top level, i.e. UI/GUI, with browser / widget ( a very simplistic view on the goal of DAP APIs).

So the hang-off point may depend on where we plug into in the above architecture.
This is probably vendor specific and we do not care about it (or do not want to care).
Therefore we may need to find a hang-off point that is abstract enough to incorporate all the views.
It seems that we all could live with "device" IMHO.

Thanks,
Marcin

Marcin Hanclik
ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452  |  Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanclik@access-company.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter-Paul Koch [mailto:pp.koch@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:39 AM
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: Jere.Kapyaho@nokia.com; Marcin Hanclik; stewart.brodie@antplc.com; public-device-apis@w3.org
Subject: Re: What does it all hang off of?

2009/10/7 Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>:
> On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 11:23:48 +0200, <Jere.Kapyaho@nokia.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't really see much utility in distinguishing APIs that use some
>> hardware capability (like camera) from those that use "software"
>> capabilities (like contacts), although I could live with it. But neither
>> of these broad groups should be accessible from navigator, as it is
>> conceptually wrong.
>
> We already crossed that bridge long ago, in my opinion. The Navigator object
> is used for these kind of APIs and creating inconsistency with that seems
> misguided. You are not starting with a blank slate here. The Web Platform
> has a lot of history and creating yet another fork in the little logic it
> has so far seems bad for authors. Everyone always thinks they can do it
> right this time around, but I've yet to see that happen.

Agreed. navigator has been around for thirteen years or more, and
that's enough reason to continue using it. Paving cowpaths etc.

There are more illogical bits in the current browser implementations;
for instance, screen (which contains the width and height of the
computer screen) is a property of window. Strictly speaking that's
nonsense: the screen is not part of the window; it's the other way
around. But everybody's accepted it and is using it.

I'm willing to consider another hook point than navigator, provided
*it's already there*. The only alternative is window, but that's worse
than navigator because it makes even less sense.

We MUST NOT pollute the JavaScript global object even more than it is today.

------------------------------------------------------------------
ppk, freelance front-end consultant,
agent, and trainer
http://www.quirksmode.org/about/

------------------------------------------------------------------

________________________________________

Access Systems Germany GmbH
Essener Strasse 5  |  D-46047 Oberhausen
HRB 13548 Amtsgericht Duisburg
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michel Piquemal, Tomonori Watanabe, Yusuke Kanda

www.access-company.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments hereto may contain information that is privileged or confidential, and is intended for use only by the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of the information by anyone else is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please notify us promptly by responding to this e-mail. Thank you.
Received on Wednesday, 7 October 2009 10:00:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:39 UTC