Re: Microsoft Socket API and Microsoft potential Sysapps recommendations support

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013, at 20:32, Alexandre Morgaut wrote:
> Note: This discussion is not limited to the Socket API.
> 
> It is probably because we have no participant from Microsoft, but I worry
> a little on that we didn't do much consideration to their Windows 8
> Socket APIs which are shared among 4 languages (JavaScript, C#, C++, and
> VB)
> -> Windows.Networking.Sockets:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/windows.networking.sockets.aspx

I can't speak for the implementers or the editors but I would not assume
that the fact that that API was not explicitly mentioned means that it
was not looked at.

> As a newbie in W3C processes and internal "negotiations" I wonder:
> 
>         • Are there been some attempts to get Microsoft representatives
>         in the working group? More globally, is it traditionally part of
>         the working group creation to try to get representative of each
>         major implementers?

In order to create a group, it is important to find interested parties
so at that stage, interested parties try to find other interested
parties. However, as far as I am aware, after the group is created it is
assumed that members of W3C knows about it and will join if they are
interested. Joining a group has many implications for an organization
though.

>         • How much should existing JS API implementations, like those
>         previously mentioned, impact the work for the W3C standards
>         version to encourage their future migration?

It really depends on the context. If that work is historic and highly
used, the standardisation process might just make it the new standard.
This is not the case here though. Firefox OS, Chrome Apps, Tizen and
Windows 8 all have a different Raw Socket-like API. We have been
discussing that during the F2F and the conclusion was that we should
focus on having the "right" API based on Streams being worked on in
different places.

> Part of my worries are motivated by how much I'd want Web Developers to
> be able to use Sysapps APIs for Windows apps as for other ones. But of
> course we should still have the possibility to use polyfills, so that's
> not a full dead-end/cul-de-sac ;-)

If SysApps APIs are a success, there might be polyfills as you
mentioned. Otherwise, we could even imagining Microsoft implementing
them.

Cheers,
--
Mounir

Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2013 01:56:43 UTC