Intent to Implement and Ship: Remove [NoInterfaceObject] from DeviceOrientation Event interfaces

[Reilly Grant]

Contact emails rei...@chromium.org Spec https://w3c.github.io/deviceorientation/ Summary The [NoInterfaceObject] annotation is being removed from WebIDL. The DeviceOrientation Event specification has been updated to remove this annotation from the Acceleration and RotationRate interfaces and rename them to DeviceMotionEventAcceleration and DeviceMotionEventRotationRate in order to avoid polluting the global namespace with generic interface names. Motivation See heycam/webidl#430 for discussion of this change to WebIDL.

Interoperability risk Firefox: Public support Edge: No public signals Safari: No public signals Web developers: No signals Compatibility risk Low, the interfaces were not previously exposed and the new names are specified to avoid collisions with existing code and specifications. Ongoing technical constraints None. Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)? Yes or no. Yes.

OWP launch tracking bug https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=927965 Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5981148249325568 Requesting approval to ship? Yes.

[TAMURA, Kent]

LGTM1.  The new behavior is reasonable, and it's a trivial change,

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAEmk%3DMYYumfiWBjR%2BD_-sX_K%2B6jUBM94BERUp7AJH%2B_q2-tP8w%40mail.gmail.com.

--

TAMURA Kent
Software Engineer, Google

[Mike West]

LGTM2, with the caveat that we should likely mark them `[SecureContext]`, given +Balazs Engedy and +Philip Jägenstedt's conversation on restricting the underlying events. Would it be reasonable for us to push for that restriction in the spec?

-mike

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGH7WqFCQGO%2BG%2B0USi96LkafxsEDw8XXeJcksVG947YbbF4h4w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Daniel Bratell]

LGTM3 (but see mkwst's comment)

/Daniel

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAKXHy%3DfNf7NFLyyT5jZ5_WoCrKCM-46cwQPUV7wxX9KZZPv%3DCA%40mail.gmail.com.

--

/* Opera Software, Linköping, Sweden: CET (UTC+1) */

[Reilly Grant]

I agree, but that work should be done under the banner of the other Intent just to avoid confusion over the intent (no pun intended) of each.

Reilly Grant | Software Engineer | rei...@chromium.org | Google Chrome

[Balazs Engedy]

Looks like the spec change for [NoInterfaceObject] was already merged. I submitted a PR on top of that, which also includes marking up DeviceMotionEventAcceleration and DeviceMotionEventRotationRate with the [SecureContext] attribute.

[Reilly Grant]

I misunderstood the interaction of removing [NoInterfaceObject] and adding [SecureContext]. The change to do the former for these interfaces has just landed and I'm going to follow up with another patch to add [SecureContext] to those so that this intent only affects secure contexts. I still want to be sure that there is agreement on your PR before changing the event interfaces themselves.

Reilly Grant | Software Engineer | rei...@chromium.org | Google Chrome