Re: Standardizing console APIs: Where?

I would argue that there has been developer pain with console in
particular. I provide IE 8 & 9 as clear examples of the console host
object being inconveniently non-standardized.


On 2/25/13 7:54 AM, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>On Monday, 25 February 2013 at 14:47, Robin Berjon wrote:
>
>> To reinforce what Marcos was saying: this isn't about not doing it.
>> We're simply asking the question of whether it's worth spending time on.
>> 
>> Building a standard is expensive. A lot of the time, that cost is small
>> compared to the savings it brings to developers (and users, but that's
>> less obvious here) and so we just do it. But here, a few of us are
>> wondering if there really is that much pain on the developer side.
>> 
>> I've never noticed much in the way of problems with the console API, but
>> I'll readily admit that I'm quite unsophisticated in my usage of it, and
>> while I use it every day it's pretty much just for console.log().
>> 
>> If there's a clear case of developer pain (as opposed to making a
>> standard because it's neater) then I'm certainly happy to see it happen.
>> 
>> If that happens, I don't know if TC39 wants it or not, but in case it's
>> rather not then I can think of at least two groups in W3C that we could
>> likely bring this work to speedily (i.e. without having to worry about
>> chartering and such issues).
>
>I'll add that if this is about authoritative access to developer
>documentation, then this should be done on webplatform.org. That's now
>the authoritative place to document the Web platform for developers,
>AFAIK.  
>
>_However_, if evidence of interoperability issues can be presented, and
>those are causing developer pain, then that makes for a stronger case for
>standardisation.  
>
>-- 
>Marcos Caceres
>http://datadriven.com.au
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 25 February 2013 15:02:42 UTC