- From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 01:18:21 +0000
- To: Brendan Eich <brendan@secure.meer.net>
- CC: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
From: Brendan Eich [mailto:brendan@secure.meer.net] > I don't even know what 3 means. Is it well defined, or just some utopia? I think it is as well defined as 2 is. Both are really in terms of vague requirements: 2. Widget libraries should be implementable without leaking implementation details to non-determined consumers. 3. Widget libraries should be implementable without leaking implementation details to determined consumers. > Let's work on 1 first, then get to 2, and declare victory. I think the crux of my argument is that this would be a mistake. > If Maciej is loath to implement 1 before 2, because widget APIs will leak implementation details, perhaps we shouldn't standardize in a hurry. I still see value in multiple implementors tracking a draft standard spec. I fully agree with this, however.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 01:18:50 UTC