- From: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 21:14:46 +0000
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Justin Lebar <justin.lebar@gmail.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Apr 13, 2013, at 11:24 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: >> The method is definitely not intended to be synchronous in Firefox's >> implementation. >> >> I don't even know what it means to synchronously do an operation like this. >> Obviously the vibrate() call doesn't block until the phone starts >> moving, or something like that. I tried to say that from the developer's point of view the method works as "fire and forget". An implementation surely should be asynchronous. >> Could you elaborate on how making this method sync and spinning the event loop >> impacts content authors? I agree with Anne that making this sync seems Very >> Bad. > > Yeah, it should simply return early and then asynchronously do the > vibration bits. A proposal: * IDL change: vibrate() returns boolean. * In steps 3 and 5 return false instead of throwing. * In steps 6, 7 and 9 return false instead of aborting. * Between current steps 9 and 10 return true. * In step 10 say "run the following substeps asynchronously". Would that work for you? Any bugs? -Anssi
Received on Monday, 15 April 2013 21:15:17 UTC