There's a lot to consider in that sentiment. It's a lot like File system access (sandboxing argument) and using a camera with your phone in a web app is hanging in the balance. Doesn't require a plugin, just UA implementation. I believe that there's more in this example that is necessary for UA extension and not necessary for HTML/CSS/JavaScript. And it would be interesting to me, to see how this resolves inside ChromeOS or inside FirefoxOS. However, I've been persuaded with this thread. I could support the notion that a plugin is an effective way to drive support for a prollyfill. As long as that's the result. Maybe the hesitation I had was due to an incomplete mission statement for the prollyfill.org group - maybe this could be articulated somehow? On Dec 13, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: > In short, the Web MIDI API exposes hardware that you just don't get access to anywhere else in the web platform today - so it requires a plugin at the moment.
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2012 22:36:03 UTC