- From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:57:30 +0100
- To: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAEC208vs0f2rwZBqqtYvAqwabiRhc1tj6Tca2hdp3C0V+3RUmg@mail.gmail.com>
Hello, On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr> wrote: > On 01/30/2012 12:43 PM, Kenneth Rohde Christiansen wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > Orientation lock is already part of the CSS Device Adaption spec as part > > of the viewport meta tag, though this is only going to be optional and > > should be ignored for normal web browsing due to the effect on usability > > (think about navigating session history). It is thus mostly useful for > > fullscreen applications and stand alone web apps. > > Actually, I was thinking of asking this to be removed from CSS DA. > A JS API seems more useful than an CSS property. For example, CSS DA > I agree with that and I am ok with removing it from CSS DA. I was just pointing out that it was there right now. > doesn't seem to allow you to read screen orientation value. It also > doesn't allow you to know when the screen orientation changes. In > addition, doing dynamic changes to the current screen orientation is > pretty annoying (doable with CSSOM I believe). > In the other hand, a JS API would allow you to do all of that and > locking the orientation very easily. The only drawback is that you can't > declare the screen orientation of your application in the header of the > HTML file. However, at Mozilla we believe that could be set in the > application manifest (see the link to the conversion Robin gave for more > details). > That would be a good idea > Also, I do not think the specifications should restrain the conditions > in which the screen orientation lock can happen. At least not at the > It doesn't have to do that, but it could point out that UAs might want to restrict the orientation lock to certain situations. But I think we might end up with most browsers acting differently and causing fragmentation, thus some recommendation should be fine and can be ignored if the UA seems fit. > beginning (so implementors can easily experiment) and that should not be > a hard requirement (not a MUST). If a UA wants to allow content to lock > the screen orientation in any situation, that should be doable. UA > should take care of their own user experiences. Some UA might require > fullscreen to be set before (that seems sensible), some might just allow > this for pre-installed content (without requiring fullscreen). > > > On the other hand, I think it would be nice to have a hint to the > > fullscreen api requestFullscreen where you could define a preferred > > orientation (which it would then lock to), something like > > requestFullscreen(HORIZONTAL). It would even be nice if the UA could > > tell whether it was possible to enter horizontal fullscreen mode or not, > > so that there can be some kind of fallback. Having it this way, it would > > be possible to click/tap on some element and animate the transition > > (scale + rotation) into the final state. > > Linking screen orientation and fullscreen like that seems a bad idea. > Basically, you can only lock and never reads. In addition, how do you > handle an iframe requesting fullscreen? > We need this to be tied together in some way, so that it is possible to click on say, a video element and have to animate entering fullscreen and rotating at the same time. Doing these two transitions separately, would look pretty bad (at least animated). Cheers, Kenneth -- Kenneth Rohde Christiansen Senior Engineer Nokia Mobile Phones, Browser / WebKit team Phone +45 4093 0598 / E-mail kenneth at webkit. <http://gmail.com>org http://codeposts.blogspot.com ﹆﹆﹆
Received on Monday, 30 January 2012 14:58:20 UTC