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,
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