On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Mounir Lamouri <mou...@lamouri.fr> wrote:
> On 25/06/13 17:28, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > I don't see this. Can you give some examples? > > On Mozilla's side, there are a few APIs that we are pushing and do not > interest other vendors for the moment. Most APIs related to Firefox OS. > Right. On Google's side, it is harder to find examples because I do not follow > that as closely but requestAutocomplete() is an example of an API that > Mozilla might not look at for quite some time. > If we think these use cases are (or ever will be) relevant, we need to give feedback even if we don't plan to implement them soon. We should at least try to make sure these APIs are something we wouldn't feel bad about implementing, and complain if they are. > > On Apple and Microsoft side, they do not anyway express intents before > shipping but Apple has a history on Webkit iOS for pushing APIs that > sometimes ended up in specs and sometimes just stayed as a Apple-only API. > I know. That's bad behavior on their part. However, I think Apple and Microsoft are mostly followers currently. > If "no answer" means "we don't care about your use cases", then we can't > > let that block our progress, because there are always going to be > use-cases > > we need to solve that no other vendor is currently interested in. > > I agree that getting blocked because other vendors don't care about our > use cases is not a good situation. However, it is easy to push bad APIs > because no one had time to look into it and then, when they do, having > two competing API which ends up in a mess (IDB vs WebSQL for example). > My point is not that we will do that on purpose but we are opening a > door to situations like these. > I think that door has to be opened. AFAIK Apple never really solicited feedback on WebSQL before shipping. Also, there was no attempt to create a proper spec. (A proper spec would have included a spec for SQLite, so if they had done that, maybe we would have adopted it after all!) So I don't think we would repeat the WebSQL error under our proposed policy. So I see your point, but I think it's fair to expect other vendors to provide feedback on our API proposals if they care about the use-cases, and for us to do the same for them. The available bandwidth and level of investment is higher than it used to be. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w * * _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
