- From: Jeffrey Yasskin via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:57:00 +0000
- To: public-web-bluetooth-log@w3.org
Roughly. I'm not sure of the name of the getter and member, and whether we can have people use `Object.observe()` on the member instead of the `onchange` event. I believe we can forbid the platform from rejecting the resulting promise (just return `false` if the user's forbidden access). So we might wind up with: ```javascript navigator.bluetooth.hasAdapter() .then(adapterInfo => { // adapterInfo.value will be kept up-to-date by the UA as long as the availability // object is alive. It is advised for web developers to discard the object as soon // as it's not needed. handleBluetoothAvailabilityChange(adapterInfo.value); Object.observe(adapterInfo, () => { handleBluetoothAvailabilityChange(adapterInfo.value); }); }); ``` Or ```javascript navigator.bluetooth.getAvailability().then(availability => use(availability.available)) ``` `getAvailability()` extends to a future where we might give explicit access to particular adapters, or tell developers whether BT is disabled, or whatever. `hasAdapter()` is more targeted, which avoids getting hopes up, and lets us optimize more for the specific information the developers are getting. -- GitHub Notif of comment by jyasskin See https://github.com/WebBluetoothCG/web-bluetooth/issues/127#issuecomment-123442443
Received on Tuesday, 21 July 2015 18:57:09 UTC