You are reading a single comment by @splch and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
In the case when the user mostly keeps the bangle on them, maybe it could be assumed the ambient temperature is a couple degrees lower than the 'wearing temperature'?
So maybe there would be three temperature measurements:
- 'Ambient temperature' measured when the bangle is probably not worn and not charging.
- 'Wearing temperature' measured when the bangle is worn.
- 'Assumed ambient temperature' which would be a set number of degrees lower than 'wearing temperature'.
When the last 'ambient temperature' reading became too old then 'assumed ambient temperature' would take it's place.
But I also suspect that Gordon might be right :p.
- 'Ambient temperature' measured when the bangle is probably not worn and not charging.
Ganblejs
@splch
@Ganblejs I like the idea of recording temperature relative to the mean… But if a person is always wearing their watch, the man will always be high. Gordon might be right about acceleration being the best way to go.
@user140377 We definitely can, and I think that it’d be great to check if the sensors have power before using them. But I’d like a low-power solution that works if the user isn’t powering their HRM or GPS.
@rigrig I agree, temperature alone isn’t enough. I can’t think of a use of temperature that isn’t able to be fooled 😂 I like the worn event! It’d make sense to me to have certain widgets start on the worn event. I was only thinking about either a global variable or function…
@Gordon I’ll update the function to check if certain sensors are powered on (like HRM) before using that data. I also need to collect some more data with the healthStatus movement! That function might be enough to detect if you’re wearing the watch :)