W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2012

RE: Next step for DAP Ambient Light Events

From: Tran, Dzung D <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 04:19:41 +0000
To: Doug Turner <doug.turner@gmail.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: François REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <84BCA539DD96614691177EDA3CE4FF0546BD78FC@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
I am in favor of the below.

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Turner [mailto:doug.turner@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 2:49 PM
To: Tab Atkins Jr.
Cc: François REMY; Marcos Caceres; Doug Turner; CSS WG; public-device-apis@w3.org
Subject: Re: Next step for DAP Ambient Light Events

> For my own needs, yes.  The range names are more than sufficient for 
> page/app styling based on light conditions.  You should only need to 
> use the lux value if you're doing a game or something that wants a 
> continuous value.

Exactly.  That is why we expose the lux value.  Removing the value means reducing the use cases.

For what its worth, this conversation is similar to the discussion the DAP had regarding proximity events.  Proximity sensors  report how far an object is away from a sensor.  This is reported by the DeviceProximityEvent.  However, we felt there was a need for a very specific event that reported if the 'user' was near or far from the sensor.  The use case is basically if the users's face is close to the sensor or not.  For this, the UserProximityEvent was invented.

Maybe we should leave DeviceAmbientLight alone and add a new event type for reporting changes in the general range of ambient lighting.

Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2012 04:20:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:21 UTC