W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > November 2014

Re: "Requirements for Powerful Features" strawman.

From: Nottingham, Mark <mnotting@akamai.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 21:53:33 -0600
To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
CC: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@fb.com>
Message-ID: <D3FEE3B5-DC51-4BA7-A1E5-E5C2E87818E8@akamai.com>

> On 22 Nov 2014, at 4:05 am, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
> 
> Mark (Nottingham) noted that we need to distinguish between "new" features and features whose historical context created decisions that are suboptimal today. I'll certainly be adding text to the doc to make a path forward for those types of APIs more clear.
> 
> ‚ÄčThere's a distinction between entirely new functionality and new replacements for to-be-deprecated, but widely used, functionality. Completely new functionality has no existing users (sites) so you have a true "green field" situation (e.g. Service Workers). If you are trying to replace some existing widely-used legacy functionality, the situation is different, since too many barriers in the path of the new thing may just lead people to stick with the legacy solution longer.

Yes; see:
  https://gist.github.com/mnot/38df717849b775eec3a4/550e9adc5791786ca1c8a0ade72712c466ef6978#adapting-existing-specifications

… for what I was thinking.

Cheers, 

--
Mark Nottingham    mnot@akamai.com   http://www.mnot.net/


Received on Sunday, 23 November 2014 03:54:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:08 UTC