- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:26:34 -0800
- To: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>
- Cc: John Mellor <johnme@google.com>, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Christiansen, Kenneth R" <kenneth.r.christiansen@intel.com>
3On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013, at 15:48, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> My impression has been that the vast majority of apps only need a >> single orientation that is independent of media-query results. If >> that's the case, then I think the above is too complicated. I.e. if >> that is the common case, then we should support: >> >> "orientation": ["landscape"], >> >> or maybe even >> >> "orientation": "landscape", > > I definitely agree with that. Though, we should allow both syntaxes > (array and string). > If we want a more complex system later, we could move to that. For the > moment, I think we should keep it simple. Also, when comparing how > applications handle landscape/portrait, it is worth considering how > common/easy it is to write responsive UI on the platform. iOS has a very > limited number of device sizes so I am not really surprised that iOS > applications try to optimize for some sizes (thus arbitrary ignore some > others). Is that common on Android? Would that be common using Web > applications? I too am curious what the use cases are for switching orientation based on screen size is. If your app runs fine in both orientations, then why lock the orientation at all? I thought that the main use case was for something like a video player or a game that wanted to always be in landscape mode was the main use case? / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 19:27:37 UTC