W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > August 2009

Re: ISSUE-4 (api-versioning): API Versioning [APIs - General]

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:21:39 +0200
Message-ID: <4A965023.7060008@opera.com>
To: "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, "<richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com>" <richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com>, Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>


Marcin Hanclik wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Traditionally  (discussed thoroughly in WebApps and BONDI) I am in favour of versioning.
>
> My motivation is not based on the need to release new version of the API or syntax or whatever every month or year.
> I would be happy if the standard could stay e.g. in version 1.0 forever.
>
> The principle is: "give it a name".
> We should clearly identify the parties and rules governing the ecosystem, version of the specification is such a rule for APIs and syntaxes.
>
> My motivation is purely practical.
> We have a cloud of:
> a) releases of specifications,
> b) incomplete or bad implementations,
> c) contents.
>
> In DOM there is hasFeature() method, e.g. explicitly used in the DOM3Events.
> If we want to drop versioning then I assume we should also drop hasFeature(), since it is the same problem.
> As stated below by Anne new releases of the specification may break backwards compatibility.
> If it is ok, then I assume we should allow the content to advertise based what (which version of) specification it was developed.
> Content developed against versionless specifications has little chance to survive and be usable if the specification changes.
>
> It may become a requirement for the software engines to be backwards compatible for practical reasons.
> As you may know, versioning - as a generic issue - is currently discussed in TAG and WHATWG, so we could first look at the arguments there, since my belief is that they are similar to ours.
>

Discussions around versioning are booooooring and getting us nowhere. 
I've personally had it up to here with filibustering around versioning. 
We've discussed versioning to death in BONDI, on WebApps, etc. I think 
we should just take a vote (or something) and reach a formal resolution 
and be done. Then, when either side raises this again, we just point 
them to the resolution and move on.

As a process thing. It would be nice to have a place where the group's 
resolutions are publicly available. Is there some way to suck 
resolutions out of Trackbot?

Kind regards,
Marcos
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 09:22:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:38 UTC