Re: [battery] ISSUE-114 (was: [contacts] Proposed text to clarify the relationship between low and critical conditions (ISSUE-114))

Le jeudi 21 juillet 2011 à 17:27 +0200, Francois Daoust a écrit :
> > I said I'd come up with some text to address ISSUE-114 during the
> F2F: "Battery spec should note relative ordering of battery low versus
> battery critical in terms of criticality". Further discussions during
> the F2F concluded that we'd drop batterylow and batterycritical events
> and add something like a "status" attribute that can take the values
> "ok", "low", or "critical".

The problem that I see with that approach is that you can't register to
get only "critical" battery events.

This means that if you're only interested in the "critical" state, you
would end up getting a lot more events than you need (and thus
ironically, drain the battery more than you need).

This could probably be addressed by an additional parameter to the
addEventListener call, but I'm not sure it's really better.


Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2011 14:15:44 UTC