- From: Deepanshu gautam <deepanshu.gautam@huawei.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:05:51 +0000
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
I think as a user in web platform it is easy for me to abandon a bad developer (poor written application) then a UA (my mobile phone). So if I don't like the developer it is their loss. Regards Deepanshu Gautam Service Standards, Huawei Software T: +86 25 5260008 M: +86 135 85147627 > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@berjon.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 6:47 PM > To: Deepanshu gautam > Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org > Subject: Re: [vibration] Preliminary thoughts on the vibrator spec > > On Nov 23, 2011, at 10:18 , Deepanshu gautam wrote: > > [DG] I'm not proposing to enable Vibration automatically (without > user consent). It is just to allow Web Apps to know whether Vibrator is > OFF and then notify UA. Which may then ask user to switch it on > (however, that part is out-of-scope here). This will avoid UA/OS/device > to keep monitoring if some unavailable functionality is being used and > then notify user. The better way would be for *app* to say "Hey I want > to use XXX would you like to switch it on" and user may decide to > switch it on for that particular session, forever, forever for that > particular application etc. > > I think that that's precisely what I'm not seeing consensus on (and > personally disagree with). > > Your argument is essentially that you don't trust the UA to do the > right thing: you want to vibrate, you don't know if you can so you try > it, the UA can't but doesn't tell the user. > > The counter-argument is that we don't trust the developers to do the > right thing: the developer notices that vibration is off and blocks the > execution of the app until it is turned on. > > All this distrust is good :) It's the stuff that makes us choose the > right checks and balances. > > Arguments in favour of leaving it up to the UA are that it's relatively > easy to fix a small number of UAs that do it wrong and almost > impossible to fix millions of apps. Also, putting it on the UA side > means that control is in the user's hands and not the developer's. > > The Web platform is very different from traditional platforms in at > least one very important way. On traditional platforms, developers are > kings and get to do pretty much whatever it is they want, no matter > what the user thinks. On the Web, developers are always second to users. > If I want to use a user style sheet that overrides your design I can. > If I want to zoom the font to a level I like I can. If you want to know > things about me that I don't wish to tell, I simply don't tell you. If > you want access to resources on my device, you need my permission. > > That's a feature. It requires a change in mindset on the developers' > side - but it's a good change. > > -- > Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 15:09:01 UTC