RE: Geolocation Errata and Updated Working Draft

Michael,
We should try to move this forward.  Are you planning to raise something with public-script-coord?

-Giri

-----Original Message-----
From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux [mailto:dom@w3.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 4:58 AM
To: Mounir Lamouri; Michael van Ouwerkerk
Cc: public-geolocation
Subject: Re: Geolocation Errata and Updated Working Draft

Le mardi 15 juillet 2014 à 21:50 +1000, Mounir Lamouri a écrit :
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2014, at 19:43, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> > My perspective is that Position and Coordinates would be 
> > dictionaries (and thus, not exposed in the global namespace) if 
> > dictionaries were allowed as attribute values; but I'm happy to 
> > bring this back to public-script-coord if you think that would be useful.
> 
> I tried to have the Screen Orientation API return a property bag (ie.
> dictionary) and that did not work out very well [1]. FWIW, the spec 
> can already make this possible by returning an ```object``` and 
> explain how to set the object properties in prose.
> 
> I think it would be good to go to public-script-coord and expose the 
> situation and see what is recommended. I am pretty sure this is not an 
> unusual pattern and having a recorded discussion about a good practice 
> would be for the best.

Sounds good to me; Michael, would you be willing to start such a discussion?

> > >  Obviously, if those
> > > interfaces had to be exposed, you would want to prefix them with 
> > > Geolocation (ie. GeolocationPosition, GeolocationCoordinates, 
> > > GeolocationPositionError).
> > 
> > Makes sense, indeed. I guess I would be interested in perspectives 
> > from implementors point of views.
> 
> Changing the interface name doesn't require much work. The 
> cost/benefit ratio is worth it if the interface ends up exposed.

(that's indeed what I meant :)

Dom

> [1] https://github.com/w3c/screen-orientation/issues/13

> 
> -- Mounir
>

Received on Thursday, 9 October 2014 13:55:21 UTC