- From: Tim Volodine via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 16:46:10 +0000
- To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Regarding the 'onchange' event, generally I am inclined towards something with 'update' in it, e.g. 'onupdate', 'ondataupdate' etc.. That's because 'onchange' is a bit imprecise since a sensor can produce same readings for sequential timestamps. The state names all make sense. But apart from the naming however I am wondering how this would look like in case there is no sensor available. So upon construction the state would always be "idle" independent of whether the sensor can be activated? Once errored would it remain errored if we call stop()? // e.g. in normal case "idle" | start() "activating" | "active" | stop() "idle" // in no-sensor case "idle" | start() "activating" | "errored" | stop() ? -- GitHub Notification of comment by timvolodine Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/78#issuecomment-219477306 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 16 May 2016 16:46:12 UTC