- From: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 07:47:22 +0000
- To: Anton Vayvod <avayvod@google.com>, "public-webscreens@w3.org" <public-webscreens@w3.org>
[+public-webscreens]
[Relaying the comment Anton made on GitHub [1] to the public-webscreens mailing list. This is to test drive the workflow proposed by MarkFo [2] where we have the technical discussion on the public-webscreens mailing list and only record the resolution of issues in GH when consensus has been reached.]
In [1] Anton commented:
On 04 Sep 2014, at 16:59, avayvod <notifications@github.com> wrote:
> Why can't we just have an "available" property to match the event? This seems to be the consistent thing with other APIs.
I believe that as long as we define an �unknown" state too, that�d work. A boolean may not be able to convey enough information in this case, given we�d probably like to make a distinction between �not available� and �don�t know yet�. Something like:
enum AvailableState { �unknown", �available", �unavailable" };
interface NavigatorPresentation : EventTarget {
readonly attribute PresentationSession? session;
PresentationSession requestSession(DOMString url);
attribute AvailableState availablestate;
attribute EventHandler onavailablechange;
};
Are there implementability concerns in keeping the availablestate in sync? On the presenting page availablestate would always be �available�.
Thanks,
-Anssi
[1] https://github.com/webscreens/presentation-api/issues/11
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webscreens/2014Sep/0005.html
Received on Friday, 5 September 2014 07:48:47 UTC