On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> 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. -Ekr > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/ >
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 15:41:55 UTC