On 2012-11-09 2:43 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
Hmm, well, a partial feature might be considered useful for web developers,
but still finishing the implementation may mean changing the way that the
partial implementation works later on, which is likely to break stuff that
rely on it. I'm not sure how you'd reconcile the two sides here.
Do you have a concrete example from the past where all the following were true:
1) Letting Web authors use a partial feature was considered useful.
2) The partial feature was shipped with prefix.
3) Had the partial feature been shipped without prefix, completing
the feature would have caused worse breakage then unprefixing the
feature.
Or do you have a concrete example from the past where all the
following were true:
1) Letting Web authors use a partial feature was considered useful.
2) The partial feature was shipped without prefix.
3) Completing the feature caused breakage that was worse than the
breakage that would have been caused by shipping the partial feature
with prefix and unprefixing the feature after completion.
Sort of. Well, from time to time we add a new DOM API which breaks a
website because they expect that name to be available as an expando
property or something. But that's not really important, I'm mostly
concerned about the stuff that we will ship in the future. The specific
thing that I'm worried about is Web Audio which is a huge spec and we
may not be able to implement all of it for quite a while for a variety
of reasons, and it might be difficult to decide whether implementing
more of it will break existing users, because, among other things, the
spec is also changing.
Cheers,
Ehsan
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
