Re: Blog post for review

with that I mean ... I don't care about Promises as much as I'd like to see
Push Notification concretely implemented cross browser for real Web Apps
plus all lower level hardware access FirefoxOS has that W3C is not even
mentioning.

These are things needed but unfortunately these things cannot be polyfilled.

br


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
andrea.giammarchi@gmail.com> wrote:

> only "gotcha" I see is that if things can be implemented already in JS ...
> things are out there in some github repo already. What we need in the core
> is stuff that cannot be implemented in JS.
>
> As example, month spent behind Promises definition is against this
> manifesto, imho, since those were all possible to simulate already via JS
> but AFAIK Domenic, the main person behind Promises/A+ signed this petition
> too.
>
> Anyway, the manifesto is OK, now facts would be an even better answer ;-)
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:05 PM, François REMY <
> francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> I also hope this won't cause an uncontrollable
>>> browser fragmentation ... I mean, even worst
>>> than current one, where every script needs
>>> 387 checks before knowing what's available
>>> at that time for that browser.
>>>
>>
>> We can't control what browser do or do not implement. However, if we move
>> toward a prollyfil/polyfill model, we can let the author decide beforehand
>> the features it want to require and import scripts for those that aren't
>> implemented natively. Once you load the scripts for the features you use,
>> you don't have to care about them.
>>
>
>