- From: Nabil Elisa <nabil.elisa@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:37:57 +0100
> > Yes, that is a neat solution. However, it is still the case that at this > time we should not add new features, otherwise we might get too far ahead of > the implementations, and the quality of implementations will go down. > I support the suggestions that Francisco made and I accept that some of them might be too much to add right now. However, while I see the argument for not racing ahead too quickly, I do think the last suggestion brings excellent value in terms of 'additional effort to implement' vs. 'additional benefit given'. Considering how useful this feature would be for web-apps (which I thought HTML5 was meant to be geared towards) I think that this is too tempting to pass up. Furthermore I'm not sure I agree with Ian's argument for holding out until the browsers support the current API more reliably. My experience has shown that there are numerous cross-browser incompatibilities in the existing implementations of more trivial features, yet we are not waiting for all of those to get resolved before adding support for, say, native video. So why should this be any different? Anyway, I'm new to this group and don't know much about how decisions are usually made here, but in case there was any doubt about this idea's popularity I'd like to lend it my own +1. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090915/165c733d/attachment.htm>
Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 02:37:57 UTC