- From: N.V.Balaji <nv.balaji@samsung.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 20:54:53 +0530
- To: "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L" <bs3131@att.com>, Niklas Widell <niklas.widell@ericsson.com>
- Cc: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, public-device-apis@w3.org
-------------------------------------------------- From: "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L" <bs3131@att.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 8:10 PM To: "Niklas Widell" <niklas.widell@ericsson.com> Cc: "Doug Turner" <dougt@mozilla.com>; "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>; <public-device-apis@w3.org> Subject: Re: Device light and proximity sensor > On the DAP call today I mentioned some thing related to this, and Dzung's > update to the Sensor spec in response to Doug's spec. Overall, my goal is > that we get specs to CR with at least the >minimum functionality that > developers need to build effective apps. The one/many spec debate has been > had before, and I will remain on the sideline there (ere are valid points > on both sides). > > I'm more concerned that the Sensor APIs contain the essential > functionality. I'm not yet convinced that a simple min/max response for > the ambient sound/light and proximity sensors will be >enough, ie that no > information/control of trigger points and event rate is needed. But I can > be convinced if someone can explain how a Web developer would deal with > such issues in an >efficient, cross-platform way in the case that > platforms vary widely in these additional aspects. I feel, addition of sensor_granularity and interval parameters can help to solve parts of the problems that you have mentioned. The interval parameter is used in device orientation event specification ([1]) as well. Developers can detect the usefulness of the data based on these two parameters. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/orientation-event/ > > Thanks, > Bryan Sullivan > > On May 8, 2012, at 5:07 AM, "Niklas Widell" <niklas.widell@ericsson.com> > wrote: > >> On 2012-05-07 17:58, "Doug Turner" <dougt@mozilla.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 7, 2012, at 8:47 AM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L wrote: >>> >>>> I do like the simplicity of the proposals. I would like to see them >>>> extended to ambient sound as well, using the same simple model >>> >>> Yup. I agree. >> >> Is there anything preventing doing all the sensors in the current [1] >> sensor API with similar solutions? >> >> [1] >> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/sensor-api/Overview.html#datatypes >> >
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 15:26:47 UTC