W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2013

Re: IndexedDB, what were the issues? How do we stop it from happening again?

From: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:43:10 -0500
Message-Id: <B027CEE2-04F0-4133-A974-EB5B89228483@la-grange.net>
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>

Le 7 févr. 2013 à 10:28, Marcos Caceres a écrit :
> I don't understand "made by the branding on the spec more than by the reality of interactions and sources"?  

People say: "Oh it's an ugly API! Yeah for sure, it is designed by $ORG. This is a proof that design by committee is bad."

What I'm saying is that a spec published at $ORG is orthogonal to the "design by committee" rant. Some will be edited by one person, some by a group, some will be good, some will be bad.

In the case of Web Alarm API, it seems it is a DRAFT (important to not) which has been inspired by a spec from one specific vendor without modifications. And… the 1st DRAFT. So why should it be perfect from the start?

but I digress. 

Agreed with the rest of the email about indexedDB and identifying the patterns. 


-- 
Karl Dubost
http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 15:43:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 7 February 2013 15:43:13 GMT