Hi, My recommendation would be to have unstable SysApps APIs (pre-LC are pretty unstable) in their own namespace:
xwalk.experimental.* This convention is borrowed from chrome.experimental.* APIs, and allows us to ship future versions of the APIs after they’ve stabilized on navigator.* in parallel with the experimental versions. I’d prefer not to have the working group name (“sysapps”) in the namespace, as it is not relevant information to the developer using the APIs. Thanks, -Anssi On 20 Nov 2013, at 05:05, Huo, Halton <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sakari, > > Could you make a final decision which namespace that sysapp API will using? > navigator.* or xwalk.sysapps.*? > > Thanks, > Halton. > From: Poussa, Sakari > Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:04 PM > To: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen > Cc: Huo, Halton; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to Implement: [Android] W3C > DeviceCapabilities/Codecs > > Sorry, my bad. I thought all the sysapps APIs are under navigator, but seems > that they are using xwalk.sysapps.* > > Then this API should follow that pattern as well. Which I guess is what > Kenneth is also saying. > > BR; Sakari > > From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 at 12:24 > To: Sakari Poussa <[email protected]> > Cc: "Huo, Halton" <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to Implement: [Android] W3C > DeviceCapabilities/Codecs > > Still, all other sysapps API's are "prefixed" as they are under the sysapps.* > namespace. Thus if the specs change at some point they can be migrated to > another place and two incompatible implementations can be supported in > parallel, with the one under sysapps.* as deprecated. When you add things > directly under navigator.* you can never reuse that place for the final API > when it reached Recommendation level. > > This scares me. > > Kenneth > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Poussa, Sakari <[email protected]> > wrote: > Hi, > > I would not like to prefix it. Actually, I think it would be fine to use the > namespace as in the the spec (navigator). All the SysApps APIs are now more > or less experimental and if we start second guessing what is more mature than > the other, we’ll have this discussion for each API. > > Thus, my recommendation is just to implement the spec as it is now. > > BR; Sakari > _______________________________________________ > Crosswalk-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
