W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > February 2013

Re: [proximity, light] Dispatching events at objects (was: Please confirm DAP comment resolution)

From: Anssi Kostiainen <anssi.kostiainen@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:23:30 +0200
Cc: "public-device-apis public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>, "ext Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl>, Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Message-Id: <9E116906-585D-4731-9914-143E1D392948@nokia.com>
To: ext Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>
Hi Rick,

On 21.2.2013, at 21.43, ext Rick Waldron wrote:

> Yes, I haven't had time to both learn the spec authoring process, the spec authoring language and also write the spec—while also keeping up with my extant commitments. 

Understood. As said, I'm (and I guess all the fellow editors too) always happy to help you to make the process of authoring a spec as painless as possible. There are certain process hoops that need to jumped through though.

> I'm sorry to say that there was never much motivation here, since most of the copy/paste designs already have implementations. The whole thing felt like an exercise in futility, considering the lack of historic precedent in support of implementors wanting to support alternative designs or even consider dropping the existing APIs (especially where platform code, eg, b2g/gaia, has been written).

Too bad. Personally speaking, I really liked your proposal, as did many others. But if an implementation ships, the spec typically cannot be changed in backwards-incompatible ways.

> Ironically, this is being closed just as my company has begun working with Mozilla on the b2g/gaia platform—where all of these APIs will become central to our solutions.

Sounds exciting! I'm impatiently waiting for what you come up with.

KUTGW!

-Anssi
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 14:24:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:58 UTC