W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > March 2012

Re: addEventListener and side effects (was: CfC to change Sensor approach, not progress current draft)

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 17:52:24 +0100
Message-ID: <1332435144.13943.22.camel@altostratustier>
To: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
Cc: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com, public-device-apis@w3.org
Le jeudi 22 mars 2012 à 09:49 -0700, Doug Turner a écrit :
> >> yes, but it is simpler and follows a known pattern. 
> > 
> > So does my proposal (it's modeled on the battery API).
> The battery API isn't shipping everywhere.  Device orientation (and
> soon device motion) is shipping in Firefox, Opera, and Chrome.  

Sure; but that only shows one was started earlier than the other, not
that it provides a better model.

> > (if in fact activation-on-addEventListener is OK, I'll update
> > http://scriptlib-cg.github.com/api-design-cookbook/ to reflect this)
> Sure.  It is what Device Motion and Orientation is doing.  Why would
> it now be bad for other APIs to do this?  Lets strive for consistency.

localStorage has a design but that makes it susceptible to race
conditions; localStorage is deployed everywhere. Would we want to adopt
that bug nevertheless?

A reason why we wouldn't want to do it again is if it has been proved a
bad idea but one from which we can't easily backtrack due to existing

Received on Thursday, 22 March 2012 16:52:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:32:35 UTC