- From: Lukasz Olejnik (W3C) <lukasz.w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:31:54 +0000
- To: Device APIs Working Group <public-device-apis@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAC1M5qq6aQjZK5BwOhD=Pwk8KhiRwTheJpMVm-TRCr6G6RV0Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Hello, But won't it allow differentiation between various hardwares/settings, based on this method? If so, we can consider documenting it. Best Lukasz Olejnik 2016-01-19 20:54 GMT+00:00 Device APIs Working Group Issue Tracker < sysbot+tracker@w3.org>: > DAP-ISSUE-171: Returning false if vibration hardware is not present or > using hasVibration? (prefer promises) [Vibration API] > > http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/issues/171 > > Raised by: Adam Alfar > On product: Vibration API > > [from email at > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2016Jan/0050.html > ] > > The vibration api is currently spec'd to return false from vibrate(...) if > the page is not visible or (optionally) if the user has disabled vibration. > Can the spec be amended to return false if vibration hardware is not > present too? > > Some mobile devices such as the Nexus 7 do not have hardware support for > vibration. I'd like to provide feedback to users when their hardware > doesn't support vibration. There is an Android API for accessing this: > Vibration.hasVibrator(), though I couldn't find an API on iOS. > > Ideally we would return a promise but that change is probably not web > compatible. Another option is to add something like hasVibrator(). Because > false is already returned for a variety of cases where vibration is not > possible, I think it makes sense to also return false when hardware support > prevents vibration. > > > >
Received on Sunday, 31 January 2016 22:32:26 UTC