W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2012

Re: System Level APIs draft proposal

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 17:28:57 +0200
Cc: "public-device-apis@w3.org public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1347CBBC-47A3-41D9-BFD3-B30F779E4157@berjon.com>
To: Niklas Widell <niklas.widell@ericsson.com>
Hi Niklas,

On May 2, 2012, at 11:33 , Niklas Widell wrote:
> I would prefer to have browser-safe and non-browser-safe APIs in one WG.
> Potentially two specs (or two different sections in spec or something) per
> API depending on security solution, but I think the work will only end up
> in confusion with two Wgs doing very similar things. The reason for
> watered-down browser safe APIs in DAP was that nobody seemed to want to
> implement the non-browser-safe ones at one point in time, if implementors
> perception of this has changed I thing we should recharter DAP
> accordingly. 

No, I don't think it's a find-the-implementers issue. The motivation for keeping those separate is that the designs for APIs on either side tend to be very different, and also held up by different problems. Putting them in the same group creates confusion (as I think you will remember from the early days of DAP).

Also, apart from Mozilla who are doing both a browser and B2G, most of the time the other implementers are very different people depending on the API type. I think it's better to allow these communities to exist in separation and not be forced to hear about one another's problems, most of which they might not care about. It keeps things more manageable.

> (n.b. There are also a couple of APIs in the proposal that does not have
> corresponding DAP apis, I see no reason why these couldn't be added to DAP
> charter, actually added back for a couple of them)

Can you please specify which ones you are thinking of? DAP is looking at changing its charter so it could be useful to know.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 15:29:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:30 GMT