- From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:13:52 +0900
- To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
On 3 Feb 2006, at 09:37, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * olivier Thereaux wrote: >> I also think we could port the soap interface from HEAD to this: > > As far as I can tell, this new feature received almost no review so > far, Most people, developers included, won't ever notice the feature until it's prominently featured on validator.w3.org (and a buch of blogs)... But we won't put any new feature there until we get a lot of reviews... This is a bit of a chicken and egg problem, don't you think? The lack of reviews is precisely one reason why I'd like to add the feature to a release, tagged experimental if necessary: so that people can start using it. Such "APIs" are popular enough among web devs that I'm fairly confident we'll get, if not reviews, at least a few users. > I'd rather not commit to any form of maintenance and/or stability > of it. While I would be sensitive to arguments such as "the soap interface is broken because soandso", I have trouble agreeing with this viewpoint. We have a situation where the "common practice" is screen scraping, and we can't really tell people to us something else because the alternative the unstable, experimental, proprietary XML, which however has been tagged "here be dragons" for so long the paint has worn down and no-one gives a damn any more. So it's really not a problem of committing to the maintenance of something new, it's really keeping the promise of "removing these features altogether in favor of a full-blown SOAP interface" (sic.), and at last have something that we actually maintain. If adding this interface into 0.7.2 gets a lot of negative comments, then at least we'll have an opportunity to have something better in 0.8.0, no? -- olivier
Received on Friday, 3 February 2006 08:14:58 UTC