W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: [vibra] Vibration API

Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:29:24 +0200
To: "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com" <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>, Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Cc: "anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com" <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>
Message-id: <CABCEAA0.1BE6F%jmcf@tid.es>
I think Vibration should be considered under a more general topic which is
'Haptic Feedback'.

One example is the technology from Immersion [1] (present in some devices
like Galaxy S) that allows to provide more elaborated Haptic feedback to
the user, than the old 'beep', 'beep' thing.



El 11/10/11 15:06, "Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com"
<Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> escribió:

>Makes sense to me, and thanks for bringing this up Anssi.
>regards, Frederick
>Frederick Hirsch
>On Oct 11, 2011, at 7:18 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> Hi Anssi, All,
>> On 10/11/11 5:10 AM, ext Anssi Kostiainen wrote:
>>> [ cc: public-webevents ]
>>> Hi All,
>>> Mozilla has done some early prototyping work around vibration API in
>>>Gecko [1]. Given that the Device APIs group has "an API to manage
>>>vibration" in its Charter [2] I believe it makes sense to look at this
>>>topic in this group soonish. For this reason, I added Vibrator API as
>>>one of the potential topics for the upcoming TPAC F2F [3].
>>> There has been discussion on the public-webevents ML around this [4],
>>>and the conclusion seems to be that the Device APIs group could be the
>>>home for the potential spec. I could volunteer to be an editor to gets
>>>things moving, but I'm also happy to hand over the spec to eager
>> Given an "API to manage vibration" is an explicit deliverable for DAPI,
>>I think the conclusion re scope is very clear: vibration API is DAPI's
>>spec. If someone in Web Events wants to contribute to this spec, they
>>need to join the DAPI WG.
>>> Chairs - Do you think we could fit a slot for this topic somewhere so
>>>that it would work for both the groups?
>> My recommendation is for DAPI to put this API on its agenda (if so
>>desired) and going forward, we set an expectation that DAPI's list
>>(public-device-apis) will be used for all related discussions.
>> Frederick, Robin - agreed?
>> -AB
>>> -Anssi
>>> [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679966
>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2011/07/DeviceAPICharter
>>> [3]
>>> [4]

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at.
Received on Thursday, 13 October 2011 17:30:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:54 UTC