W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > June 2014

Re: [battery] Moving Battery API forward, next steps?

From: Tim Volodine <timvolodine@google.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 18:57:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJv4RS1j-ttkYycB0YsJnBGbUQiEgqoWpXofVtqktb9yop-Fzw@mail.gmail.com>
To: frederick.hirsch@nokia.com
Cc: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>, W3C Device APIs WG <public-device-apis@w3.org>, ldeluca@us.ibm.com
A few more comments on the current Battery Status API specification:

1. default value for chargingTime:

I think this has been raised in previous comments, but the default value
for chargingTime is still unclear. I think the first paragraph about
default values should look like:

"When the promise is resolved with the battery manager object and the
implementation is unable to provide any battery information the default
values should be as follows (which is equivalent to a fully charged
charging=true, chargingTime=0, dischargingTime=Inf, level=1."

The "any" clause is important because in the paragraphs below the
chargingTime is said to be +Inf if it cannot be provided by the
implementation, which by the way makes more sense than 0 for platforms
where this attribute cannot be provided (possibly temporarily).

2. multiple batteries:

level -- instead of "sum" of levels it should be "average",
dischargingTime -- should be max dischargingTime if in parallel and sum if
in series.


On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 3:58 PM, <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> wrote:

> Anssi
> I believe the following open items remain for the Battery API:
> 1. Proposed edit to new 2nd paragraph in section 6,
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Jun/0077.html
> (Frederick)
> 2. Follow up question/comment from Cathy
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Jun/0079.html
> 3. ACTION-699: Giridhar Mandyam to Review battery and how low battery
> threshold is handled
> 4.. Add warning to Battery API that (naive) implementation of API could
> negatively affect battery life
> Tim,
> I believe all of your comments have been addressed, see Anssi’s message:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Jun/0070.html
> Can you please confirm or note any remaining issues?
> Lisa
> I believe Anssi addressed the various Cordova issues as noted in this
> email:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Jun/0068.html
> Can you please confirm that there are no additional issues or concrete
> proposals for the Battery API from the Cordova community?
> Giri, have you received any internal feedback related to your action?
> Anssi
> Are you aware of any additional open issues or questions related to the
> Battery API?  Can you please send a summary to the list? Also, if you are
> able to address any of the open issues I noted above before this Thursday’s
> DAP call, that would be helpful.
> Thanks
> regards, Frederick
> Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
> @fjhirsch
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 17:58:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:33:09 UTC