- From: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 15:19:16 +0100
- To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
On Dec 1, 2009, at 14:37 , Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > Le mardi 01 décembre 2009 à 14:26 +0100, Robin Berjon a écrit : >> To clarify my intent, what I'm interested in finding is the smallest >> set that is implementable everywhere *today* and *without >> optionality*. > > I see value in that approach, but I think it’s worth noting that as soon > as we go for the lowest common denominator, we drop the use cases of > making a Web app your addressbooks manager since the said Web app > wouldn’t be able to see (let alone edit) values that are outside of the > LCD. Indeed, that's the trade-off we have to make. It's not a nice one, but then that's why people pay us money to work on this stuff. > I personally think that leaving that use case for v2 is fine. Agreed, and I would like to stress (again) the fact that delivering a v1 with everything in 2011 isn't any better than delivering a v1 in 2010 with a subset and a v2 in 2011 with everything :) In fact, I'd argue it's a fair bit worse! > (a similar discussion is likely to arise for the Calendar API — I think > we’ll need to be much more careful for that one) Yes. Let's solve Contacts, see how it works out, and try to apply the solution to Calendar. -- Robin Berjon robineko — hired gun, higher standards http://robineko.com/
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 14:19:51 UTC