- From: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:02:46 -0400
- To: ext Max Froumentin <maxfro@opera.com>
- Cc: Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, timeless <timeless@gmail.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
> There is some confusion on the meaning of internal and external, I > realise. I should make it clearer what I meant: > - internal means battery > - external means AC > > In that case we should remove internal/external terminology and define > attributes as: > - isBattery: true if the current power source is a battery > - isBeingCharged: true if the current power source is a battery and is > being charged > > What do you think? This seems clearer and more straightforward. regards, Frederick Frederick Hirsch Nokia On May 11, 2010, at 10:47 AM, ext Max Froumentin wrote: > On 10/05/2010 17:36, timeless wrote: > >> >>>>> If both highThreshold and lowThreshold parameters are >>>>> specified, the success callback is triggered if and only if the >>>>> property value is either lower than the value of lowThreshold >>>>> or higher than the value of highThreshold. >>>> It's odd that you've stuck this into lowThreshold but not high >>> What do you mean? >> >> == attribute double highThreshold This attribute has no effect on the >> get() method. On the monitor() method, it indicates that the >> successCallback is only be triggered if the property is a number and >> its value is greater than or equal this number. attribute double >> lowThreshold This attribute has no effect on the get method. On the >> monitor() method, it indicates that the successCallback is only be >> triggered if the property is a number and its value is lower than or >> equal this number. If both highThreshold and lowThreshold parameters >> are specified, the success callback is triggered if and only if the >> property value is either lower than the value of lowThreshold or >> higher than the value of highThreshold. == >> >> That last sentence is only present in the description of the second >> attribute. > > > Ah, I see. It was the most logical place to put it. After both high > and > low were defined, but not separate. I don't know if it's wise > repeating > the same text in both places, either. > >>>>> Indicates whether the internal power source is currently >>>>> charging. A value of true, indicates that the battery is being >>>>> charged. If false then the battery is not being charged. >>>> What if I have an external battery which is being charged? >>> then both isExternal and batteryBeingCharged are true. >> >> The description says "internal power source is currently charging", >> I'm offering to charge the external power source. I think you should >> elide "internal". > > There is some confusion on the meaning of internal and external, I > realise. I should make it clearer what I meant: > - internal means battery > - external means AC > > In that case we should remove internal/external terminology and define > attributes as: > - isBattery: true if the current power source is a battery > - isBeingCharged: true if the current power source is a battery and is > being charged > > What do you think? > >>> I've looked for a reference that explained the meaning of all the >>> terms that I considered, and failed to find one. Do you know if >>> there is something out there that would indicate what those terms >>> mean? >> >> Wikipedia's articles here don't seem particularly bad: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_(computing) >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_usage > > CPU usage redirects to CPU time, described as "The CPU time is often > measured in clock ticks or as a percentage of the CPU capacity". The > name "time" is rather inadequate, though, so let's go for usage then. > >>>> What if I'm using 2 or more connections concurrently? >>> That's very advanced for this API. See previous discussions on this >>> topic. >> >> Link please? :) > > The tracker is down at the moment, and I'm not sure what to look for > in > my email, but the group decided that we shouldn't put in the API > features that we can't see used outside of a system monitoring > context. > For instance, we don't find a common use for exposing multiple CPUs > and > their frequencies. The same principle applies here: how often does a > device use multiple internet connections? Should it matter to the API > user? I think that the answer is no. > > >>>> The VPN case worries me. >>> Sorry to hear. Why? >> >> People are unlikely to be aware that exposing details of their vpn >> connection is more interesting and potentially dangerous than just >> exposing their network connection. I might be willing to provide the >> connection details for my normal network connection, but corporate >> policy probably doesn't want me to disclose my vpn's information. >> Above you've specified that the UA can only disclose one, so which >> does it pick (and how?). > > That seems to be a good use case for policy rules, actually. I expect > the policy framework comes up with would cater for this scenario. > > >>>> TYPE_BLUETOOTH? >>> or IRDA, RS-232, USB, WAP, etc. I wasn't sure where to draw the >>> line and include standards that define a whole protocol stack, or >>> ones that merely act as tethering protocols, or ones that just >>> encapsulate Ethernet. I'd very much welcome a comprehensive list. >> >> I'd kinda want the list to be based on properties (pulse based v >> cable, power expensive, currency expensive, range [short, medium, >> long]): USB is Cable+Minor+Free+Short. Ethernet is >> Cable+Minor+Free+Medium. IRDA is Beam+Medium+Free+Short. Bluetooth is >> Radio+Medium+Free+Short. GPRS is Radio+Expensive+Expensive+Medium. >> WiMax is Radio+Expensive+Expensive+Long. >> >> People generally don't need to know the name, they need to know the >> attribute (is it $0, is it power hungry, can I ask the user to shake >> the screen, ...). > > It would be interesting to have those attributes, but I don't think > it's > going to be what webapp developers will want. Adding Bluetooth, WiMax, > USB (or just Serial) seems acceptable, but listing mobile phone data > network types (GPRS, EDGE, etc.) risks becoming quickly obsolete. > >>>> Or a UA defined type? >>> As a free-form string? It's tricky because they're basically not >>> usable. >> >> The contrast was to this: == attribute unsigned short code The code >> attribute SHOULD contain one of the error values defined in this >> specification. An implementation MAY define additional error codes, >> but those MUST NOT use the numeric values defined here. == > > I'm a bit lost. You suggested that the type of network connection is a > UA defined type, in constrast to a number, such as error codes? Can > you > elaborate on how it would work? > > >> Btw, I'd suggest that you reserve a certain range, either for >> standards values or for UA values. >> >>>> This is not what I think about when I read RAM. I'd rather >>>> "FLASH" even if it's terribly inaccurate. >>> I'd rather something accurate, so any suggestion is welcome. >> >> My colleague here said "usually they'd call it Flash", so let's >> pretend I didn't posit that it might be inaccurate. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory >> seems to indicate that Flash is perfectly reasonable. "Not to be >> confused with USB flash drive or Memory card" is funny, because: >>> A memory card or flash card is an electronic flash memory data >>> storage device used for storing digital contents. > > ok, changed. > > >>>>> The number of image sensor elements (pixels) of this camera >>>> This is a strange way to write what you're trying to say. >>> What's a better way? >> >> Dunno, my problem is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel#Megapixel >> >> == ... each sensor element can record the intensity of a single >> primary color of light.... These sensor elements are often called >> "pixels", even though they only record 1 channel (only red, or green, >> or blue) of the final color image. == >> >> The problem is that there's a 3x multiplier between "sensor >> elements" and what I think you want ("pixels"). >> >> This isn't my area, I'm just a parser. > > Mine neither. I've changed to "picture elements", which avoids the > problem at the cost of making the definition kinda circular. > > Cheers, > Max. > >
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 17:04:15 UTC