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

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Anne van Kesteren <> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Eric Rescorla <> wrote:
> > It could be, but at the cost of inconveniencing users in the name of
> > specification purity.
> navigator.getUserMedia(), unprefixed, never shipped in any
> implementation. Removing it therefore does not inconvenience
> developers. What implementations do with their proprietary
> implementations is up to them. And implementations having proprietary
> implementations should not put pressure on the specification process
> (unless it turns out we have to standardize one of the prefixed
> variants, but that seems unlikely long term).

We've been through this point already, so I'll just briefly repeat my
previous point that there's a difference between accommodating a prefix/
non-prefix versus a totally separate interface style. I realize we disagree
on this point, and I don't expect either of us to convince the other.


> --

Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 15:41:55 UTC