W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > October 2014

Re: Strawman Promises consensus position, based on Thursday's telechat

From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 08:12:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBMmJ9gREHc-6o32mzW6mjsdQQvxU+1HJgoCGoDZwTYT0w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:43 PM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
> > What you're seeing people push back against is a wholesale deprecation
> of an
> > API that's been around in two independent implementations (three, if you
> go
> > back to when Opera had its own implementation) for on the order of two
> > years, and which has seen pretty broad adoption by webdevs. Some of us
> don't
> > want to break existing deployed applications. Others don't seem to think
> > that this is important. That's the crux of the disagreement.
> I don't think that's true. Deprecating something does not mean
> breaking deployed applications. At least not immediately. We could
> definitely continue to support the callback-based methods for some
> period to come, while at the same warning developers that they should
> switch to the One True Way of doing things going forward. That warning
> could be place for two years for all I care.
> What I objected to is the proposed ultimatum that we add promises, but
> we cannot even encourage developers to switch to that version of the
> API for a minimum period of another two (or three?) years.

That's not what I proposed. What I proposed was that we agree that there
would not be proposed standards action to remove it. And my opposition
to warnings is based on a concern that if there is a warning there will
be a request in 3 months to remove it from the standard. If we are
agreed that that won't happen for a reasonable period of time,
I'm OK with a warning.

> Furthermore, as Jake pointed out navigator.getUserMedia() is going
> away in favor of navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia(). The latter is
> relatively new and could switch to promises straight away. The former
> never shipped as such in user agents and could therefore be removed
> from the specification.

It could be, but at the cost of inconveniencing users in the name of
specification purity.

Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 15:13:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:30 UTC