- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:26:19 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Chundong Wang <chunwang@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "whatwg@lists.whatwg.org" <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Chundong Wang wrote: > > Hello - Got a question of screen orientation on portrait/landscape. > > Let's say we have a device doesn't support portrait-secondary, by > spec<http://www.w3.org/TR/screen-orientation/> we should remove it from > allow list which is fine. However if web developer specified "portrait" > instead of "portrait-primary" for lockOrientation(), which I suppose is > a common case, we'll have to expand it to "portrait-primary, > portrait-secondary" according spec. In this case the lockOrientation() > would fail because orientations isn't a supported orientation set. I > don't think it'll satisfy the original purpose of "portrait". > > IMHO, we should explain this more detailed. We could either, > > 1. Only expand "portrait"(or "landscape") into allowed orientations, > or; > > 2. Filter out disallowed orientations from orientation sequence and > lock the screen with that list. I believe feedback on this specification is intended to be sent to public-webapps@w3.org. HTH, -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 12 July 2013 17:26:42 UTC