- From: Rick <graham.rick@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:02:25 -0400
- To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Cc: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAGDjS3c4BxX3mSNH3Qrj=dHbqDMgetAxYar_DPhhgp-RqL1BZw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: > > What is the bar for "sufficiently widely supported" ? Presumably if a > capability was available only on one platform then a web API for it would > not gain much support. At the other end, if there was only a single example > of a platform which did not support a given capability, would that be ok ? > > What is the requirement for the "fall back" software implementation ? > Presumably there should be some applications that can work acceptably using > the fall-back. Is it required that all applications work in some fashion, > or is it acceptable that some applications do not work at all ? I imagine, > for example, that a navigation app probably can't work at all without > GPS-equivalent geo-location. > > ...Mark > > My experience with the SVG working group, we looked for two implementations of a feature before including it in a recommendation. It was not required that it be open source, merely that it be demonstrable. However there is nothing in SVG that isn't coded as open source somewhere. -- Liked it, shared it, gave a thumbs up to the great JC and moved on in a smooth and efficient ballet of holy surfing designed to bring glory to the lord and spread bad spelling and grammar to the filthy masses. Amen.
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 15:02:52 UTC