On May 1, 2014, at 1:40 PM, Thomas Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I just don't see why that > is going to be useful to anyone. If you were talking about open source > and/or reference implementations that the source was available for, then that > makes far more sense to me.
It's useful because it enumerates the set of things that a concrete API has to provide, which makes doing the concrete API easier, avoids omissions in the concrete API, and helps to prevent situations where the language bindings for one language are preferable to the bindings for another, and wind up driving the choice of language.
