- From: Tobie Langel via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 09:52:45 +0000
- To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Thanks for the comments, people. A couple of thoughts: 1. It seems we're looking at two things here: 1. a way to identify a physical sensor (Johnny-Five uses the pin address for that, WoT uses URI.) 2. a discovery mechanism for the consumer of the API to locate the sensor. It might be that we end up voluntarily conflating the two and using the description of the sensor as a way to formally identify it (e.g. `new Sensor.Prox({ direction: "front", position: "top-right", internal: false })`), but I think making that conceptual distinction for now makes it easier to reason about the problem (well, at least, it does for me :). Thus, using a `Symbol` as identifier, as @davidmarkclements suggests above, doesn't seem totally inappropriate (for now). Again, whether we end up actually exposing that to the platform or not is TBD. 2. Whereas discovery (1.ii above) doesn't seem really critical for Johnny-Five and/or WoT to instantiate `Sensor` objects (you respectively know in which pin you've plugged the sensor, or where given a URL to the remote sensor you're planning to hear from), it's critical at the Web Platform level as you basically know nothing about the device you're running on. Thus a system as the one @rwaldron describes above seems essential. 3. Position in relation to a device (and in particular defining its natural orientation) has been extensively worked on by @marcoscaceres, @richtr and @mounirlamouri, notably in [The Screen Orientation API][1] and [Device Orientation][2] specs. Would be great to be able to reference their work as much as possible here. 4. Similarly would there be value in stealing some of the positioning stuff from CSS (e.g. z-index). I think not, but still throwing this out here. 5. Lastly, I want to make sure we don't go down the slippery slope of defining an ontology of positioning things in 3D. This is why I like @rwaldron's proposal so far, though I already know it's insufficient to describe proximity sensors on the back of a car (there are generally four of them). Maybe a combination of @rwaldron's keyword-based proposal combined with some less readable but more extensible system would work (e.g. nested arrays? <-- I have to thing about this more) would work? [1]: https://w3c.github.io/screen-orientation/ [2]: http://w3c.github.io/deviceorientation/spec-source-orientation.html -- GitHub Notif of comment by tobie See https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/26#issuecomment-109560854
Received on Saturday, 6 June 2015 09:52:47 UTC