Re: [quota-api] TAG review feedback

Hi Domenic,

On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Domenic Denicola <
domenic@domenicdenicola.com> wrote:

>  Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> The TAG recently spent some time looking at the current Quota API draft at
> [1], based on some early discussions between Alex and Kinuko. We believe
> that the topic of quotas and storage management has important architectural
> implications for expanding the capabilities of the web platform. It’s
> important for us to provide a cohesive story in this regard, for
> integration with user agents that seek to provide native app parity. As
> such we are keen to see a workable and useful solution come out of the
> quota API.
>
>
>
> We’ve assembled our feedback into a writeup, available at
>
>
>
>
> https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2014/02/quota-management-api.md
>
>
>
> The most important part of this feedback is a call for rethinking the use
> cases and requirements being presented here. As-is, the API does not
> satisfy many compelling use cases, or provide future extensibility. The
> writeup expands on this critique, and gives some examples of potential use
> cases, requirements, and constraints that we imagine would make sense for
> the quota API. We hope this can start a discussion on how best to approach
> the problem, and evolve the API in a direction that solves those problems..
> We would love to work with the editor and other members of the working
> group on this, as we’re optimistic about the potential of this API, if not
> its current manifestation.
>

Thanks for the extensive feedback, it's really useful to move things
forward.  Some of them sound familiar, and some were excluded from the last
spec update partly because I wasn't able to come up with a good storage
model that is extensible and also understandable.  (And I admit that
current spec's failing to spot some of these points)
I do love to work with you and others in the group to improve it.  I'll
take a closer look at the feedback and will get back with responses or set
up a new discussion thread (if no one beats me).

>
Secondarily, there is a series of minor critiques on idiomatic JavaScript
> usage that we hope can prove useful for spec writers. We’ll likely be
> consolidating those into a separate guidance document for more general use,
> but the quota API provided a good concrete case study for getting us
> started.
>

This is very useful too, and they can be certainly addressed relatively
sooner.


>  Thanks for your time and consideration,
>
> The TAG
>
>
>
> [1]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/quota/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
>
>
>