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

RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning Straw Poll

From: Robison, Clayne B <clayne.b.robison@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:10:35 -0700
To: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B27EBC40D200ED48A3F4CC2EBEABAE0B12C1573378@orsmsx501.amr.corp.intel.com>
I agree.

Clayne

-----Original Message-----
From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Robin Berjon
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 6:49 AM
To: public-device-apis@w3.org
Subject: ISSUE-4: Versioning Straw Poll

Hi,

I'd like to get a rough view of where people stand with respect to API  
versioning, so here's a straw poll. Straw polls are different from  
formal votes in that they aren't binding for the WG - they just  
provide for a quick snapshot to get a feel for the state of a debate.  
Also, answers are per participant, not per company (though we'll  
notice ballot stuffing of course).

Here's the SP:

   This house believes that explicit version mechanisms on an API, such
   as have been done elsewhere using for instance hasFeature(), a  
version
   attribute on interface object, or a version parameter passed to a
   constructor are not useful in a web context and should be forsaken.
   Future revisions to given interfaces should either be strictly  
additive,
   change names, or ensure that what limited deltas are made do not  
break
   real-world code.

Answers can be:

   - I Agree
   - I Disagree
   - I Don't Care

Please reply by September 1st.

Thanks!

--
Robin Berjon
   robineko - setting new standards
   http://robineko.com/
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 16:11:19 UTC

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