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

RE: ISSUE-22: Should we have an umbrella requirements document?

From: <richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:37:27 +0200
Message-ID: <355A518BC0575547B2A3D6773AAF8EEF42F013@ftrdmel1>
To: <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Hi Frederick,

> On Sep 23, 2009, at 17:45 PM, Frederick Hirsch
<frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>
> wrote:
> 
> How will such general requirements that span multiple APIs be 
> captured and communicated outside the work group and beyond 
> the life of the work group, apart from the implicit impact on 
> the specifications?
> 

Truth be told: I can live with published or not published general
guidelines.

However, not publishing our general guidelines means not imposing
restrictions on future Device API development. Future API developers
will do what works at that time and would not be bound by our general
guidelines. If our API patterns and designs work (which are the
manifests of our general guidelines) then they will be imitated in the
future (such as we see with the W3C Geolocation specs to a degree, which
does not publish it's design guidelines).

It would be analagous to disposing of the scaffolding and allowing new
scaffolding to be created depending on the work required in the future.

Either way works for me.

Thanks,

Richard
Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 17:38:07 UTC

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