On Wednesday, January 3, 2018 at 2:43:43 PM UTC-8, Martin Thomson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 2:52 AM, Blair MacIntyre <bmacint...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > > I was more concerned about the idea (or, at least what I though might be > > suggested) that you only get orientation if they give location permission. > > This seems overkill: even if I know what the data means, I can see uses of > > orientation that I’d be comfortable with but that I wouldn’t be comfortable > > giving my geolocation. that’s all I was talking about. > > I guess that someone needs to work out how to control access to > orientation without invoking that prompt then. I think that we could > easily give access to orientation with geolocation, but I can see that > there are plenty of cases for orientation *without* geolocation. > Could we explore the gross movement idea some more?
FYI: As implemented in Chrome, permission is automatically granted to use the Generic Sensor API (`chrome://flags/#enable-generic-sensor`) in secure contexts (e.g., HTTPS, localhost). FWIW, the "Mitigation Strategies" section of the Sensors API spec covers this: https://w3c.github.io/sensors/#mitigation-strategies As for the WebVR use cases (namely, "magic window" modes, the webvr-polyfill <https://github.com/googlevr/webvr-polyfill>, etc.), check out this GitHub issue I've filed for moving away from `devicemotion`: https://github.com/googlevr/cardboard-vr-display/issues/10 _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
