W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > October 2013

Re: [vibration] How to handle iframes?

From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 15:55:00 +0100
Message-ID: <CAF40kP6uiqnWT8pYmW-cyqNKqgJgsdTg-1yqDUae9xgwKXgJpA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@chromium.org>
Thanks Anssi! That looks correct, though subtle in a one-liner like that,
for cancelling a vibration pattern. Would it make sense to say something
about having multiple browsing contexts and how concurrent patterns are
resolved?

Regards,

Michael



On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Kostiainen, Anssi <
anssi.kostiainen@intel.com> wrote:

>
> On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:57 PM, "Kostiainen, Anssi" <
> anssi.kostiainen@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 4, 2013, at 6:45 PM, Michael van Ouwerkerk <
> mvanouwerkerk@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> We would have to change the spec to say that navigator.vibrate(0) only
> cancels the pattern in that frame. Patterns played from other frames are
> unaffected.
> >>
> >> I've gone over the Geolocation API spec a number of times recently, and
> I don't remember it saying anything about restricting to the top level
> frame.
> >
> > This was just a proposal sent to the mailing list IIRC, so it never
> landed to the spec.
> >
> >> What do you think?
> >
> > Looks good to me.
> >
> > All - do you have concerns with Michael's proposal? If I hear no
> concerns, I'm happy to update the spec.
>
>
> Here's a proposed fix to the algorithm.
>
> Current:
>
> [[
>
> 8. Cancel the pre-existing instance of the processing vibration patterns
> algorithm, if any.
>
> 9. If /pattern/ is an empty list, or if the device does not provide a
> vibration mechanism (or it is disabled), then return true and terminate
> these steps.
>
> ]]
>
> Proposed fix:
>
> [[
>
> [NEW] If there is a pre-existing instance of the processing vibration
> patterns algorithm running for this browsing context, run the following
> substeps:
>
> 1. Cancel the pre-existing instance of the processing vibration patterns
> algorithm, if any.
>
> 2. If /pattern/ is an empty list, or if the device does not provide a
> vibration mechanism (or it is disabled), then return true and terminate
> these steps.
>
> ]]
>
> Here's the full context:
>
>   http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/vibration/#dfn-processing-vibration-patterns
>
> Michael, All - let me know if you spot bugs in this proposal. I'll land
> this after your review.
>
> Tracker - this relates to my ACTION-652.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Anssi
>
>
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2013 14:55:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:01 UTC