On 4/4/2014 10:06 AM, Florian Bösch wrote: > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Kostiainen, Anssi > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > In the initial versions of the spec we indeed considered such > reuse. Here's my recent summary: > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Apr/0002.html > > > If you have a navigator.gamepads and a navigator.vibrator how do you > know which vibrator belongs to which gamepad? And do you want to end > up with a navigator.forcefeedback, navigator.flightPedals, > navigator.spacemice, navigator.hapticdevice, navigator.hotas, > navigator.thrustquadrant, navigator.artificialHorizons, > navigator.radioPanels, navigator.touchscreens, navigator.trimPanel, > navigator.missileControl, navigator.steeringWheel, > navigator.carPedals, navigator.racingWheel, navigator.gearStick, > navigator.joyStick, navigator.etc? And how would you know which of > those belong together into one device? This is my last reply to you, because I don't think you're being constructive. Anssi's posts were discussing the possibility of reusing the Vibration *interface* in the Gamepad spec, such that we could declare that "Gamepad implements Vibration", and wind up with a Gamepad.vibrate method that works like navigator.vibrate. I don't know if this is what we want to do, but it's worth investigating so we don't reinvent the wheel if we don't have to.
-Ted
