I think "APIs which only Mozilla is interested in at that time" needs
clarification that this refers to APIs that solve use cases that only
Mozilla is interested in. If other vendors are interested in those
use-cases, but don't like our API proposal, we can't just brush that off.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts
Note that things started changing in the WebGL world since the last time
that this was discussed.
With the Blink fork, the Chromium community started their switch from
prefixes to behind-a-flag for new WebGL extensions. They didn't change
already-implemented extensions (presumably to avoid breakin
On 6/21/13 15:45, Andrew Overholt wrote:
I'd appreciate your review feedback. Thanks.
I'm having a hard time rectifying these two passages, which seem to be
in direct contradiction:
1. "Note that at this time, we are specifically focusing on /new/ JS
APIs and not on CSS, WebGL, WebRTC,
Back in November, Henri Sivonen started a thread here entitled
"Proposal: Not shipping prefixed APIs on the release channel" [1]. The
policy of not shipping moz-prefixed APIs in releases was accepted AFAICT.
I've incorporated that policy into a broader one regarding web API
exposure. I'd lik
4 matches
Mail list logo
