(note that when I list an inconceivable amount of ridiculous device APIs to add, it's meant as satire of the idea that you should make a specialized API for every assemblage of sensors, motors and displays)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Florian Bösch <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Kostiainen, Anssi < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> One way to spec that would be to make Vibration its own interface, and >> say GamePad implements Vibration. For more advanced use cases (borrowing >> one from your list): >> >> interface SteeringWheel { >> readonly attribute Vibration[] vibras; >> }; >> > > I think that the idea of a list of vibrators is fine. I'm explicitely > against adding a specific device interface for every conceivable device > configuration (of which there are probably thousands). I'd like the API to > be simple and ****non monolythic*** and to concentrate on the components, > of which there are about half a dozen, 2 being already covered (buttons and > axes) and a 3rd being what this thread is about (vibrators), such that more > could be added in the future. > > >> Based on what I hear, it sounds like we'd likely need its own interface >> that is more capable than the current Vibration. >> > I don't know what the vibrators specification specifies, long as it's got > speed that seems fine. >
