Re: [battery] getBattery() vs. requestBattery() pattern

On 03 Jul 2014, at 12:47, Mounir Lamouri <> wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jul 2014, at 07:23, Domenic Denicola wrote:
>>> The Battery Status API doesn't require user permission to access the battery:   
>> Right; in general we are pretty much done with infobar-style permission
>> asks, as a platform. But we can still use the
>> requestAccessToX().then(gotAccess, didntGetAccess) style even if getting
>> access is not done as the result of an infobar. Perhaps you get access if
>> you declare the need in a manifest, or if you're transported over HTTPS,
>> or you get it by default but the user can toggle it off on a per-webpage
>> basis. The user-facing API can still be uniform.
> I don't think the requestFoo() model works very well for battery. The
> API is defined in a way that if you did not get access to the battery
> for the reasons listed above, we still RECOMMEND getBattery() to return
> a BatteryManager with default values.

I made a small editorial tweak to clarify this:



Received on Thursday, 3 July 2014 12:25:24 UTC