- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 12:58:09 -0400
- To: ext Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- CC: ext Joran Greef <joran@ronomon.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Yes I agree, as has been said before on this list, that comments are always welcome and let's all please make sure those comments are consistent with the principles to which I referred. -Art Barstow On Apr/1/2011 12:21 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Arthur Barstow<art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: >>> Hear. >>> >>> I am starting to think that Mozilla will step up and provide an embedding >>> of SQLite, even if it has to only think of it as such. It will have to. >>> >>> People would rather use a working database than something crippled albeit >>> "specced" (see LocalStorage or IndexedDB). >>> >>> It was things like XHR in all their unspecced glory that brought the web >>> to where it is today. >> Joran - as one of the moderators of public-webapps, I find your comments >> above offensive to those that work on the specs you mention. > FWIW, I think the comments were substantive and made a potentially > valid point, without impugning the editors of the relevant > specifications in any way. Functionality is very important to > authors, and it's fair to argue that underspecified but powerful and > easy-to-implement features can sometimes be better than > better-specified features that won't have nearly as many features for > some years to come. We should all remember that while > interoperability is important, so are features, and we cannot rule out > technologies for not being interoperable enough without considering > their advantages as well. (I have no strong opinion on the specific > issue in question, though.) > > I would not be offended if someone made comments such as this about a > spec I write, and think it would be bad to discourage feedback like > it.
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 16:58:42 UTC