Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
Harald (on CC) is working on it here: https://github.com/mozilla/platatus On Oct 29, 2015 6:38 PM, "Tom Schuster" wrote: > Seems like this kind of died. I still would like to see this happening. Is > this on somebody's agenda? > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Tom Schuster wrote: > > > I see 3 (now 4) old pull requests that are unmerged. > > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Anthony Ricaud > wrote: > > > >> On 16/07/15 21:26, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > >> > >>> Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view > >>> on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites > >>> [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it > >>> out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is > Mozilla's > >>> opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible > >>> answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. > >>> > >>> In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your > >>> help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information > >>> that can help us: > >>> https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard > >>> > >>> Thanks for your help! > >>> > >>> [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features > >>> [2] https://status.modern.ie > >>> [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html > >>> > >> Reminder: We need your help! Please submit a pull request against > >> https://github.com/Rik/platform-status/blob/master/features.json. > >> > >> (I've only received one pull request since moving this JSON to Github > :( ) > >> > >> ___ > >> dev-platform mailing list > >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > >> > > > > > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
Seems like this kind of died. I still would like to see this happening. Is this on somebody's agenda? On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Tom Schuster wrote: > I see 3 (now 4) old pull requests that are unmerged. > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > >> On 16/07/15 21:26, Anthony Ricaud wrote: >> >>> Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view >>> on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites >>> [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it >>> out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's >>> opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible >>> answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. >>> >>> In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your >>> help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information >>> that can help us: >>> https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard >>> >>> Thanks for your help! >>> >>> [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features >>> [2] https://status.modern.ie >>> [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html >>> >> Reminder: We need your help! Please submit a pull request against >> https://github.com/Rik/platform-status/blob/master/features.json. >> >> (I've only received one pull request since moving this JSON to Github :( ) >> >> ___ >> dev-platform mailing list >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform >> > > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
I see 3 (now 4) old pull requests that are unmerged. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > On 16/07/15 21:26, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > >> Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view >> on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites >> [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it >> out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's >> opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible >> answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. >> >> In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your >> help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information >> that can help us: >> https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard >> >> Thanks for your help! >> >> [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features >> [2] https://status.modern.ie >> [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html >> > Reminder: We need your help! Please submit a pull request against > https://github.com/Rik/platform-status/blob/master/features.json. > > (I've only received one pull request since moving this JSON to Github :( ) > > ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 16/07/15 21:26, Anthony Ricaud wrote: Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help us: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard Thanks for your help! [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features [2] https://status.modern.ie [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html Reminder: We need your help! Please submit a pull request against https://github.com/Rik/platform-status/blob/master/features.json. (I've only received one pull request since moving this JSON to Github :( ) ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
This is awesome. When you have a final place for the data, I'll look at pulling this into status.modern.ie so Firefox data is always up to date. https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/Status/issues/246 ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 17/07/15 16:46, James Graham wrote: On 17/07/15 04:21, Eric Shepherd wrote: Agreed. This is about how we feel about a spec, its content, and the design of its API, not about if or when we will get around to implementing it. That's also something worth capturing, but they're not the same data points at all. I think it's the exact opposite: people want to know what features to expect in forthcoming Firefox, they don't really care about our feelings except insofar as the latter influences the former. I think I would have categories like Implemented [behind a pref] in Firefox X / Under active development / Intend to implement / Don't intend to implement. Things that we don't know enough about to decide whether they're a good idea to implement or not can simply be left off the list; if we have nothing useful to say about technology X it's better to say nothing at all. Specifying when something shipped or will ship is clearly a non-goal for this first iteration. Plenty of resources already provide this information, starting with caniuse and MDN. Once we have the first iteration shipped, we can look at adding more data points. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 17/07/15 04:21, Eric Shepherd wrote: Agreed. This is about how we feel about a spec, its content, and the design of its API, not about if or when we will get around to implementing it. That's also something worth capturing, but they're not the same data points at all. I think it's the exact opposite: people want to know what features to expect in forthcoming Firefox, they don't really care about our feelings except insofar as the latter influences the former. I think I would have categories like Implemented [behind a pref] in Firefox X / Under active development / Intend to implement / Don't intend to implement. Things that we don't know enough about to decide whether they're a good idea to implement or not can simply be left off the list; if we have nothing useful to say about technology X it's better to say nothing at all. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 16/07/15 21:26, Anthony Ricaud wrote: Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help us: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard Thanks for your help! [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features [2] https://status.modern.ie [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html This has now moved to Github: https://github.com/Rik/platform-status/blob/master/features.json You can also email me directly if pull requests are not your thing. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
Ehsan Akhgari schrieb: I think we need to have a way to signal that we are not going to implement a specific feature in addition to those categories (without delving into the specific example here, but yes this is one of those features.) That sends a useful signal to other browser vendors and web developers. I know that for us, it would be hugely helpful to know if vendor X is actively planning to not implement a certain feature when weighing the pros and cons of working on something. I can imagine the same would be useful for other vendors, and it would be nice if we did that. I agree, but I think we should have a wording that says something like "opposed to implementation" or similar and not "we will not implement", as we have seen in the past that things we didn't want to be implemented (that way) did actually pick up steam elsewhere and we ended up still implementing it - both for things that are not in line with our philosophy of the web, like EME, and for things where we had competing proposals (which we thought were the better way to go), like WebAudio. KaiRo ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
Anthony, Very very cool idea. About the features encyclopedia: Le 17 juil. 2015 à 04:26, Anthony Ricaud a écrit : > Other browsers have similar websites [2] > [2] https://status.modern.ie fwiw, The IE team has put their project on github. [4] But even better they already have a format for describing the features. [5] Maybe it would be to use something very similar if not the exact same thing, so someone who would like to import all browser vendors into one, end up having less headaches. [4]: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/Status [5]: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/Status/blob/production/app/static/ie-status.json -- Karl Dubost, Mozilla http://www.la-grange.net/karl/moz ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
Agreed. This is about how we feel about a spec, its content, and the design of its API, not about if or when we will get around to implementing it. That's also something worth capturing, but they're not the same data points at all. Eric Shepherd Sr. Technical Writer Mozilla Blog: http://www.bitstampede.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/sheppy > On Jul 16, 2015, at 10:26 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > Thinking about this more, I really don't see why we should try to narrow down > the list to fewer items. I feel like our default position on a random spec > is "no opinion", because we aren't aware of the content ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On 2015-07-16 9:21 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Benjamin Kelly >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> FWIW, I've sent an intent to implement for the Streams API, but I won't >>> be >>> able to actually start work until Q4. I just listed that as "favorable" >>> for now. Not sure if we need a clearer "we intend to implement this but >>> just haven't been able to start yet" status. >>> >> >> I would rather have: >> - done (Firefox X) >> - planned (with some vague time frame) >> - "under investigation" or "no current plans" >> >> Streams seems straightforward enough. navigator.connect would fall >> into the last category. >> > > I think we need to have a way to signal that we are not going to implement > a specific feature in addition to those categories (without delving into > the specific example here, but yes this is one of those features.) That > sends a useful signal to other browser vendors and web developers. I know > that for us, it would be hugely helpful to know if vendor X is actively > planning to not implement a certain feature when weighing the pros and cons > of working on something. I can imagine the same would be useful for other > vendors, and it would be nice if we did that. > > Thinking about this more, I really don't see why we should try to narrow > down the list to fewer items. I feel like our default position on a random > spec is "no opinion", because we aren't aware of the content. After someone > studies it a bit, we can spend a while to consider it, and then defer it to > some point into the future (as in "in support of, without current plans"), > or decide to work on it soon, or decide that we should not work on it, > etc. Of course, we can't get too fine grained to keep things > comprehensible and realistic to keep updated, but a couple of additional > categories wouldn't hurt! I don't think it's important to minimize the number of categories, but I do think it's a mistake to have categories which provide sentiment but not definiteness. What I mean by that is that I'm not a big fan of "favorable" and "unfavorable" but rather I'd rather see "planned" and "we do not intend to implement this" (though maybe there's a way to make that shorter). -Ekr ___ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 2015-07-16 9:21 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Benjamin Kelly wrote: FWIW, I've sent an intent to implement for the Streams API, but I won't be able to actually start work until Q4. I just listed that as "favorable" for now. Not sure if we need a clearer "we intend to implement this but just haven't been able to start yet" status. I would rather have: - done (Firefox X) - planned (with some vague time frame) - "under investigation" or "no current plans" Streams seems straightforward enough. navigator.connect would fall into the last category. I think we need to have a way to signal that we are not going to implement a specific feature in addition to those categories (without delving into the specific example here, but yes this is one of those features.) That sends a useful signal to other browser vendors and web developers. I know that for us, it would be hugely helpful to know if vendor X is actively planning to not implement a certain feature when weighing the pros and cons of working on something. I can imagine the same would be useful for other vendors, and it would be nice if we did that. Thinking about this more, I really don't see why we should try to narrow down the list to fewer items. I feel like our default position on a random spec is "no opinion", because we aren't aware of the content. After someone studies it a bit, we can spend a while to consider it, and then defer it to some point into the future (as in "in support of, without current plans"), or decide to work on it soon, or decide that we should not work on it, etc. Of course, we can't get too fine grained to keep things comprehensible and realistic to keep updated, but a couple of additional categories wouldn't hurt! ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Benjamin Kelly wrote: > > > FWIW, I've sent an intent to implement for the Streams API, but I won't be > able to actually start work until Q4. I just listed that as "favorable" > for now. Not sure if we need a clearer "we intend to implement this but > just haven't been able to start yet" status. I would rather have: - done (Firefox X) - planned (with some vague time frame) - "under investigation" or "no current plans" Streams seems straightforward enough. navigator.connect would fall into the last category. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > Regarding "in progress|favorable|not favorable|no opinion", I think >> that we don't need to be opinionated about features we aren't >> implementing unless we have a firm commitment not to implement the >> feature. Here I'm thinking variously about ORTC and >> navigator.connect, which we could say bad things about now and end up >> implementing later if we aren't careful. Do we really want or need to >> use this list as a political tool? >> >> Developers want to know when something is coming foremost, and maybe >> if. I think that's all we need. >> > > I think there could be value in having a clear stance on our position but > maybe that can be provided through the description field. I have no > preference and will implement whatever the consensus is. FWIW, I've sent an intent to implement for the Streams API, but I won't be able to actually start work until Q4. I just listed that as "favorable" for now. Not sure if we need a clearer "we intend to implement this but just haven't been able to start yet" status. Thanks for putting this together! Ben ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 16/07/15 21:51, Martin Thomson wrote: On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help us: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard That's a fairly clumsy input scheme. Given the scale of this now, would it be unreasonable to request a form? Or maybe put it on github and accept pull requests. This will definitely live in Github in the future. I thought starting with Etherpad would make it easier to bulk contributions given the large number of features. But I can move it to Github tomorrow if no one objects. Regarding "in progress|favorable|not favorable|no opinion", I think that we don't need to be opinionated about features we aren't implementing unless we have a firm commitment not to implement the feature. Here I'm thinking variously about ORTC and navigator.connect, which we could say bad things about now and end up implementing later if we aren't careful. Do we really want or need to use this list as a political tool? Developers want to know when something is coming foremost, and maybe if. I think that's all we need. I think there could be value in having a clear stance on our position but maybe that can be provided through the description field. I have no preference and will implement whatever the consensus is. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: > In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. > Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help > us: > https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard That's a fairly clumsy input scheme. Given the scale of this now, would it be unreasonable to request a form? Or maybe put it on github and accept pull requests. Regarding "in progress|favorable|not favorable|no opinion", I think that we don't need to be opinionated about features we aren't implementing unless we have a firm commitment not to implement the feature. Here I'm thinking variously about ORTC and navigator.connect, which we could say bad things about now and end up implementing later if we aren't careful. Do we really want or need to use this list as a political tool? Developers want to know when something is coming foremost, and maybe if. I think that's all we need. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Collecting web platform features implementation status
On 2015-07-16 3:26 PM, Anthony Ricaud wrote: Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. This is *fantastic*! In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help us: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard I wonder if etherpad is a good tool for this. It makes it impossible to tell who said what, and track the history of decisions etc. Can we instead put this on github and use PRs please? ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Collecting web platform features implementation status
Potch and I are working on a website to present Mozilla's point of view on various web platform features. Other browsers have similar websites [1] [2] [3]. This project has been in lingo for a while so, to get it out the door, we're going to focus on one information: what is Mozilla's opinion on features that have not been shipped yet. We see 4 possible answers: in development, favorable, not favorable, no opinion. In order to get accurate data and update it regularly, we need your help. Please go to the following etherpad and insert any information that can help us: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/gecko-web-platform-dashboard Thanks for your help! [1] https://www.chromestatus.com/features [2] https://status.modern.ie [3] http://www.webkit.org/status.html ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
