> On Oct 3, 2015, at 13:39 , Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiff...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Domenic Denicola <d...@domenic.me> wrote: >> From: whatwg [mailto:whatwg-boun...@lists.whatwg.org] On Behalf Of >> >>> is removal really the right thing to do, given that we have an >>> implementation? >> >> I agree this is a problematic question. I opened >> https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/209 for the more general issue but am >> happy to have the discussion here since that hasn't gotten much replies. Do >> check out the examples listed there though. E.g. Blink is in similar >> situations with <dialog> and HTML imports. >> >> The web seems to end up with a lot of APIs like this, where the spec ends up >> just being documentation for a single-vendor implementation. I don't really >> know what to do in these cases. If our goal in writing these specs is to >> produce an interoperable web platform, then such features seem like they >> shouldn't be part of the platform. > > > There is also a question about the why of the current state: is it > just a single-vendor implementation because nobody at the other > vendors has gotten around to implementing it or is it because they > fundamentally object to implementing it. If there are objections, then > it's reasonable to consider removing the feature. Otherwise, it would > be premature to remove it IMHO.
Yes. It wasn’t even our proposal (see <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0436.html>) and we feel it answers some important cases that we can’t otherwise answer. Some insights from others would be welcome. David Singer Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.