W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > November 2013

Re: The UNKNOWN mandatory constraint behavior is a footgun

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:48:53 +0000
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
CC: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A222C88B6882744D8D4B9681B31588901161F930@ESESSMB307.ericsson.se>
On 2013-11-15 01:12, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> How does "making it harder to use an API" meet any requirements at
> all? I really don't understand that request.
> You're assuming Web developers are dumb and if you make it hard enough
> to use something, they will stop using it.
> Instead what will happen is that they search StackOverflow for
> solutions on how to achieve a certain goal and if that involves
> mandatory constraints, they will get a recipe there on how to achieve
> it, copy it and be done.
> How hard it is to use an API has no (I repeat: *absolutely no*)
> influence on how often an API is being used.
> Let's not kid ourselves.
> So, in view of this: go ahead and try to make it harder. Us Web Devs
> really like a challenge - it's what we've become used to when dealing
> with Web standards and browsers. :-)

I interpret our resolution that mandatory constraints should  be "harder 
to use" symbolic and not the real desire. We've said that mandatory 
constraints should be the last resort if the app really can't function 
without a specific feature; a bit of an edge case. Then should we 
optimize for that case as we optimize for regular (optional) constraints?

My preference would be that we just have constraints, and the thing that 
makes a constraint mandatory is the result of the action taken when that 
constraint fails.

Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 05:49:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:24:43 UTC