Re: [manifest] orientation member

3On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Mounir Lamouri <> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013, at 15:48, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> My impression has been that the vast majority of apps only need a
>> single orientation that is independent of media-query results. If
>> that's the case, then I think the above is too complicated. I.e. if
>> that is the common case, then we should support:
>> "orientation": ["landscape"],
>> or maybe even
>> "orientation": "landscape",
> I definitely agree with that. Though, we should allow both syntaxes
> (array and string).
> If we want a more complex system later, we could move to that. For the
> moment, I think we should keep it simple. Also, when comparing how
> applications handle landscape/portrait, it is worth considering how
> common/easy it is to write responsive UI on the platform. iOS has a very
> limited number of device sizes so I am not really surprised that iOS
> applications try to optimize for some sizes (thus arbitrary ignore some
> others). Is that common on Android? Would that be common using Web
> applications?

I too am curious what the use cases are for switching orientation
based on screen size is. If your app runs fine in both orientations,
then why lock the orientation at all?

I thought that the main use case was for something like a video player
or a game that wanted to always be in landscape mode was the main use

/ Jonas

Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 19:27:37 UTC