W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2013

Re: [whatwg] A question about portrait-secondary of screen orientation

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 17:26:19 +0000 (UTC)
To: Chundong Wang <chunwang@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1307121725570.15729@ps20323.dreamhostps.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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:03 UTC