> If the browser vendors feel like this is out of scope for their product, > then spending the (quite extensive) > effort to design a solution will be wasted. I > wouldn't want anyone on this > list to feel their time is wasted.
I also do not like to see W3C’s valuable time continually wasted on specifying functionality that has expressly been dismissed by major browser vendors. For example: - https://www.w3.org/TR/geofencing/ and https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=383125#c46 > Indeed not! I should hope nobody would feel that way. The WHATWG is a venue > that is open to anyone willing to take part in relevant technical debate. Then please stop censoring my posts or manufacturing chicken-and-egg pre-requisites for topics you are not interested in. From: Ian Hickson [mailto:i...@hixie.ch] Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: Richard Maher; wha...@whatwg.org Subject: Re: [whatwg] Accessing local files with JavaScript portably and securely On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 3:36 PM Richard Maher <maher...@hotmail.com<mailto:maher...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > The main thing that seems to be missing from this thread is any commitment > from any browser vendors to actually support any changes in this space. It has been my experience that browser vendors, more often than not, require at least a (proposed) standard before they will consider implementing a requested feature. That's a different question. I was saying we should make sure the browser vendors care about this space at all. Requesting a specific feature be implemented comes much later, after use case collection and API design stages. If the browser vendors feel like this is out of scope for their product, then spending the (quite extensive) effort to design a solution will be wasted. I wouldn't want anyone on this list to feel their time is wasted. I would certainly not seek to stifle debate or censor someone else from having their say. Indeed not! I should hope nobody would feel that way. The WHATWG is a venue that is open to anyone willing to take part in relevant technical debate. -- -- Ian Hickson 😸
