- From: mozer <xmlizer@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:26:03 +0200
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
I agree (making a note that we will rely on the fact that Javascript allow to detect if a function exist to remove the need for a hasFeature) Xmlizer On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Robin Berjon<robin@robineko.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to get a rough view of where people stand with respect to API > versioning, so here's a straw poll. Straw polls are different from formal > votes in that they aren't binding for the WG — they just provide for a quick > snapshot to get a feel for the state of a debate. Also, answers are per > participant, not per company (though we'll notice ballot stuffing of > course). > > Here's the SP: > > This house believes that explicit version mechanisms on an API, such > as have been done elsewhere using for instance hasFeature(), a version > attribute on interface object, or a version parameter passed to a > constructor are not useful in a web context and should be forsaken. > Future revisions to given interfaces should either be strictly additive, > change names, or ensure that what limited deltas are made do not break > real-world code. > > Answers can be: > > - I Agree > - I Disagree > - I Don't Care > > Please reply by September 1st. > > Thanks! > > -- > Robin Berjon > robineko — setting new standards > http://robineko.com/ > > >
Received on Thursday, 27 August 2009 16:26:44 UTC