- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:23:08 +1200
- To: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote: > >> If it doesn't get used, why would they need to invest time implementing >> it? >> > > Putting a feature in the HTML spec (or related specs) is asking all > browsers to implement it. If we don't expect anyone but Firefox to > implement something, then it shouldn't be in there. If all you want is the > feature to have a specification, that's different--an API can have a > specification without it being inside the HTML spec, it can still be openly > reviewed here, etc. > It's not really clear to me that there's a set of specs that "ask all browsers to implement them" and another set that don't. (I for one do not plan to implement features that are not, will not, or should not be used, just because they're in the HTML spec.) But I don't really care either, as long as we end up with a good API with a good spec that has had open discussion and development just like we're doing here. Anyway, based on Aaron's mail it sounds like there is some interest from beyond Mozilla. > Rob -- q“qIqfq qyqoquq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qlqoqvqeq qyqoquq,q qwqhqaqtq qcqrqeqdqiqtq qiqsq qtqhqaqtq qtqoq qyqoquq?q qEqvqeqnq qsqiqnqnqeqrqsq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqeqmq.q qAqnqdq qiqfq qyqoquq qdqoq qgqoqoqdq qtqoq qtqhqoqsqeq qwqhqoq qaqrqeq qgqoqoqdq qtqoq qyqoquq,q qwqhqaqtq qcqrqeqdqiqtq qiqsq qtqhqaqtq qtqoq qyqoquq?q qEqvqeqnq qsqiqnqnqeqrqsq qdqoq qtqhqaqtq.q"
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2013 09:23:35 UTC