- From: Max Froumentin <maxfro@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:37:58 +0200
- To: "Robin Berjon" <robin@robineko.com>, public-device-apis@w3.org
I agree. Max. On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:48:59 +0200, 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 Friday, 28 August 2009 13:38:40 UTC