cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: iOS' device API
Date Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:28:48 GMT
I have somewhat similar concern for iOS:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1837

Wonder whether we should output the model number instead eg iPad2,5
This might solve the comical procedure to detect an iPad Mini (at least for
Cordova):
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13248493/detect-ipad-mini-in-html5


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:

> Resurrecting this one.
>
> BlackBerry has the same issue sorta.
>
> I have two play books. One is running 2.0.1.xxx, another 2.1.0.xxx. When I
> ask for "device.version", I get "BlackBerry Playbook OS" for both.
>
> Device.name also returns weird stuff for the play books, seem like
> arbitrary numbers: 100669958.
>
> Also, device.platform returns "playbook". Shouldn't this be "BlackBerry" ?
>
> /cc anyone from RIM
>
> On 11/12/12 7:27 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io> wrote:
>
> >thanks shaz
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Added:
> >>
> >> http://issues.cordova.io/1836
> >> http://issues.cordova.io/1837
> >> http://issues.cordova.io/1838
> >> http://issues.cordova.io/1839
> >> http://issues.cordova.io/1840
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Adding jira tasks as per Brian's last comment.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> +1 sounds like a plan
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> +1
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 11/8/12 4:01 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >I think would it make sense to:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >1. align apis as orig msg from fil suggests
> >> >>> >2. drop in deprecation notice for sync usage and add to deprec
page
> >> >>> >3. add async equiv and get it out of startup path as andrew
> >>suggests
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> Although I think we're close to being able to author
> >>cross-platform
> >> >>> apps
> >> >>> >> sans UA detection , I think people still have valid use
cases to
> >>use
> >> >>> it.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On 11/7/12 6:18 PM, "Andrew Grieve" <agrieve@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >I like the idea of at least removing this from the
start-up
> >>path.
> >> If
> >> >>> >>users
> >> >>> >> >want to know about the device, they could always call
exec()
> >> >>> >>themselves.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> Also, if we remove the device API like Brian
suggested, it
> >>would
> >> be
> >> >>> >> >>good in
> >> >>> >> >> the sense that we won't have to call the CDVDevice
plugin to
> >> >>> populate
> >> >>> >> >>some
> >> >>> >> >> js variables before deviceready can fire -- eliminating
a
> >> >>> dependency.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> > Agree with Fil to make it consistent - in
essence this is an
> >> iOS
> >> >>> >>bug
> >> >>> >> >>:)
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > Brian, there is one case I can think of
-- detecting the
> >>iPad
> >> >>> >>mini's
> >> >>> >> >> > features using js - Max Firt investigated
trying to do it
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> >>
> http://www.mobilexweb.com/blog/ipad-mini-detection-for-html5-user-agentbu
> >> >>> >> >>tthe only kludgy way right now using PG would
be
> >>device.platform
> >> to
> >> >>> >> >> > detect iPad2,5 and iPad2,6. I suppose ppl
would need to
> >>detect
> >> >>> >>this to
> >> >>> >> >> > enlarge certain UI elements for the mini
(since the physical
> >> area
> >> >>> >> >>will be
> >> >>> >> >> > smaller than a reg sized iPad)
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Filip Maj
<fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> CI implementation is what I am gunning
for here (and can
> >> >>> actually
> >> >>> >>use
> >> >>> >> >> it).
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> I don't like it either but reality is
for people building
> >> >>> >> >>cross-platform
> >> >>> >> >> >> apps at some point you have to do:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> if (device.platform == 'android') //
do some stuff
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> For example, knowing when to attach
to a back button vs
> >> >>> rendering
> >> >>> >> >>some
> >> >>> >> >> ui
> >> >>> >> >> >> to handle that.
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> IMO we should set up deprecation for
"name" and move to
> >> "model"
> >> >>> as
> >> >>> >> >>it's
> >> >>> >> >> >> clearer (and probably was the reason
why iOS went for
> >>device's
> >> >>> >>custom
> >> >>> >> >> name
> >> >>> >> >> >> in the first place - semantic confusion
:P )
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> On 11/7/12 7:35 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io>
wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >This may get some rotton tomatoes
thrown at me but I
> >>would be
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> >> >>favor
> >> >>> >> >> of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >axing these apis altogether. I think
they are more
> >>dangerous
> >> >>> than
> >> >>> >> >> useful
> >> >>> >> >> >> /
> >> >>> >> >> >> >developers should favor browser
feature detection for
> >>their
> >> UI
> >> >>> >>work.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >There is no programmatic reason
to want these properties
> >> >>> >>otherwise
> >> >>> >> >> that I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >can think of?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >(But agree at least should be consistent
as Fil suggests.)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:40 PM,
Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Currently if you ask for device.platform
you will get
> >> several
> >> >>> >> >> different
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> responses on iOS. You'll get
iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch,
> >>etc.
> >> >>> >>This
> >> >>> >> >> seems
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> backwards. IMO all of these
should return 'iOS'.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Related, device.name returns
the custom device name as
> >>the
> >> >>> user
> >> >>> >> >> >> defines
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>it
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> in iTunes. IMO it should return
the model name, I.e.
> >>What
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>device.platform
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> returns now.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> This would line it up with
our docs + other platforms.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message