- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 22:35:37 +0900
- To: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fiJbD4MQeoa5gfbYjCQonRhJDSd_+_=5BSFD6ytRH1bw@mail.gmail.com>
During today's presentation of an alternative API for CSS FontLoader, reference was made to so-called "Futures" or "Promises". I would like to know: (1) what material improvement is afforded to this alternative when compared with the existing (non-Futures) API proposal? that is, what new or different behavior or functionality is offered by using "Futures"? (2) where is the formal definition of a Futures API or functionality that would become a normative dependency were the "Futures" version of the FontLoader API adopted? (3) what other W3C APIs under active development (or complete) makes use of said "Futures" APIs? (4) does the proposed use of Futures create a dependency on a newer version of ECMAScript than is currently assumed by HTML (which is 5.1)? (5) what is the expected impact on schedule for reaching a FPWD (or LC) if this alternative "Futures" approach is followed?
Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 13:36:28 UTC