- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 22:08:40 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25088 --- Comment #3 from Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net> --- (In reply to Ian 'Hixie' Hickson from comment #2) > What's the difference between the webkit one and this spec's one? Most people get confused between the two. Mainly, the webkit one is only exposed for mobile devices and provides rotation angles at the window level, while this one provides screen.orientation(s) with primary and secondary notions, and the ability to lock the screen. I have tried to highlight the distinctions in this thread: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014JanMar/0479.html My take, is that the webkit legacy api should only apply to device embedded screens like a mobile phone, watch, etc (i.e. at the window level), and keep that legacy alive by implementing it into IE and Firefox for mobile devices. (separately from this api) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=920734 Mozilla seems inclined to implement the webkit window.orientation for mobile and has two bugs filed to that effect. I don't know about IE. It seem like IE saw this API as a better substitute to window.orientation, but that's not really clear. This spec's one can apply to a broader concern of screens, either remotely attached to a device or embedded. IMO, the locking aspect of the screen is tricky because a viewport does not necessarily reflect the full coverage of a monitor. The viewport could be windowed and not necessarily cover the screen like a mobile device does. Yet this Screen Orientation API is trying to address mobile devices at the same time for locking purpose, and there has been confusion with specs implementation in that regard. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25054#c4 Along Mounir mentioned incorporating angles into this API to allow mapping to angles: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24698 So things still need to be sorted out. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2014 22:08:42 UTC