W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > September 2016

Re: Comment from the APA-WG on the Vibration API

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 18:29:57 +0200
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, public-device-apis@w3.org
Cc: W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>, public-apa-admin@w3.org
Message-ID: <10b20891-f443-eb90-0fb1-31783ebdef8f@w3.org>
Hello Janina,

>From a process perspective, my understanding is that we cannot satisfy
that request at this stage of our process: the proposed addition has
impact on the conformance (given its "SHOULD" statement), and
conformance-impacting changes cannot be included via the Proposed Edited
Recommendation process.

The Working Group has already started looking at the requirements for a
new version of the spec, where these additions could be considered; I
would personally support them. But I don't see how we could integrate
them in the second edition of the Vibration API within the constraints
of the W3C process.

Would that be an acceptable way forward for the APA WG?

Thanks,

Dom

On 18/09/2016 20:29, Janina Sajka wrote:
> Janina Sajka writes:
> Colleagues:
> 
> The Accessible Platform Architectures (APA) Working Group submits the
> following comment requesting an additional "Accessibility Impact"
> section in your Vibration API specification. Our decision is archived
> at:
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2016Sep/0029.html
> 
> We recognize our request comes to you late in your process, and we
> apologize for that.
> 
> Janina Sajka
> APA Chair
> 
> 
>>
>> Colleagues:
>>
>> This CfC has recieved only messages of support. It is, consequently,
>> agreed as a consensus decision of APA.
>>
>> The head of thread for this CfC is at:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2016Sep/0000.html
>>
>> Janina
>>
>> Janina Sajka writes:
>>> Colleagues:
>>>
>>> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to the Accessible Platform
>>> Architectures (APA) Working Group on our review of the Vibration API
>>> specification:
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/PER-vibration-20160818/
>>>
>>>
>>> This CfC follows on APA Action-2084:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/2084
>>>
>>>
>>> *	Proposed Comment
>>>
>>> The Accessible Platform Architectures (APA) Working Group has found no
>>> specific problem in the Vibration API specification itself. However,
>>> we do request addition of the following section to this specification
>>> because of the need to properly support access to web content for users
>>> who are actually impeded from using web content effectively by vibrating devices.
>>>
>>>
>>> Accessibility Impact Statement
>>>
>>> The Vibration API allows applications to send a silent notification to a
>>> user in response to an event.  To date vibration seems generally
>>> associated with notifications and not as an augmenting modality for
>>> enhancing interaction with touch interfaces.  We expect that as Web
>>> developers discover the use of Vibration beyond notification, a variety
>>> of creative applications of vibration will emerge.
>>>
>>> While vibration is a powerful and effective medium of communication for
>>> many users, there are users that need to disable and/or control their
>>> device’s vibration element at a global level. For instance, a person
>>> with Attention Deficit Disorder may need to block vibrations to avoid
>>> distractions. Also, a person with Epilepsy may have an application that
>>> is detecting vibrations for tracking symptoms.
>>>
>>> For these reasons, the user agent SHOULD inform the user when the API is
>>> being used and provide a mechanism to disable the API (effectively
>>> no-op), on a per-origin basis or globally.
>>>
>>>
>>> Note:
>>> For example, an implementation might abort the algorithm because no
>>> vibration hardware is present, the user has set a preference indicating
>>> that pages at a given origin should never be able to vibrate the device,
>>> the user has disabled vibration at a global level, or an implementation
>>> might cap the total amount of time a page may cause the device to
>>> vibrate and reject requests in excess of this limit.
>>>
>>>
>>> *	ACTION TO TAKE
>>>
>>> This CfC is now open for objection, comment, as well as statements of
>>> support via email. Silence will be interpreted as support, though
>>> messages of support are certainly welcome.
>>>
>>> If you object to this proposed action, or have comments concerning this
>>> proposal, please respond by replying on list to this message no later
>>> than 23:59 (Midnight) Boston Time, Friday 16 September.
>>>
>>> Janina
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
>>> 			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
>>> 		Email:	janina@rednote.net
>>>
>>> Linux Foundation Fellow
>>> Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org
>>>
>>> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>>> Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
>> 			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
>> 		Email:	janina@rednote.net
>>
>> Linux Foundation Fellow
>> Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org
>>
>> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>> Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
>>
> 
Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2016 16:30:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:08 UTC