Re: [whatwg] Microdata status
Le 30 mai 2013 à 12:39, Michael[tm] Smith a écrit : > Alex or somebody else writes up an alternative API proposal they can be > happier with, it seems unlikely they're going to be re-implementing > anything based on the current Microdata API spec. In the process, if it ever happens, I would love to see something more or less common in between RDFaLite, data-* and microdata. When I explored [1] different ways of expressing the same information, the JS code to access the data is quite different and makes it not very user friendly in the end. [1]: http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/geolocation-html-api/ -- Karl Dubost http://www.la-grange.net/karl/
Re: [whatwg] Microdata status
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > +Ojan, +Alex > > Jirka Kosek , 2013-05-14 17:22 +0200: > > > Hi, > > > > are there any plans to change Microdata API? From the following > > conversation between Chromium developers it's not clear to me whether > > they consider API itself bad or only their implementation. > > > > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!topic/blink-dev/b54nW_mGSVU > > > > Any insight welcomed. > > Not claiming to speak for anybody on the Chrome/Blink team but as far as > that conversation among the Chromium developers, looking at it from the > outside at least, my read is that they consider the current API spec to be > bad -- not just their implementation. > > That said, it doesn't seem like anybody in the discussion other than Ojan > mentioned anything bad in particular about the API spec. Ojan's comment: > > "I have one concern with the feature as specced is that getItems and the > various Collection returning properties/methods all return live > NodeLists/Collections. [...] Live NodeLists/Collections impose a large > cost on the rest of the codebase and fundamentally make regular DOM > operations slower. > This concern could be addressed without much of a change to the current API by returning static NodeLists and/or Collections. Hixie, consider this feedback on the API. :) We're very unlikely to implement any new APIs that return live NodeLists/Collections. Whether addressing that would be enough that we'd be want to ship Microdata is unclear to me. Then there's a general comment from Alex: > > "The current micro data API is...poor. I think we should write it off and > try again. No opinions in what that means for our impl in the meantime, > though (other than it shouldn't ship, of course). I'm happy to put work > into a better API if someone will collaborate on impl." > > So anyway, it looks like the gist from the overall discussion is: They've > completely removed the Microdata API implementation from Blink, and unless > Alex or somebody else writes up an alternative API proposal they can be > happier with, it seems unlikely they're going to be re-implementing > anything based on the current Microdata API spec. > > --Mike > > -- > Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike >
Re: [whatwg] Microdata status
+Ojan, +Alex Jirka Kosek , 2013-05-14 17:22 +0200: > Hi, > > are there any plans to change Microdata API? From the following > conversation between Chromium developers it's not clear to me whether > they consider API itself bad or only their implementation. > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!topic/blink-dev/b54nW_mGSVU > > Any insight welcomed. Not claiming to speak for anybody on the Chrome/Blink team but as far as that conversation among the Chromium developers, looking at it from the outside at least, my read is that they consider the current API spec to be bad -- not just their implementation. That said, it doesn't seem like anybody in the discussion other than Ojan mentioned anything bad in particular about the API spec. Ojan's comment: "I have one concern with the feature as specced is that getItems and the various Collection returning properties/methods all return live NodeLists/Collections. [...] Live NodeLists/Collections impose a large cost on the rest of the codebase and fundamentally make regular DOM operations slower. Then there's a general comment from Alex: "The current micro data API is...poor. I think we should write it off and try again. No opinions in what that means for our impl in the meantime, though (other than it shouldn't ship, of course). I'm happy to put work into a better API if someone will collaborate on impl." So anyway, it looks like the gist from the overall discussion is: They've completely removed the Microdata API implementation from Blink, and unless Alex or somebody else writes up an alternative API proposal they can be happier with, it seems unlikely they're going to be re-implementing anything based on the current Microdata API spec. --Mike -- Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Re: [whatwg] Microdata status
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Jirka Kosek wrote: > > are there any plans to change Microdata API? From the following > conversation between Chromium developers it's not clear to me whether > they consider API itself bad or only their implementation. > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!topic/blink-dev/b54nW_mGSVU > > Any insight welcomed. I don't think there's any pending feedback on the API in the spec, so there's no current plans to change it. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
[whatwg] Microdata status
Hi, are there any plans to change Microdata API? From the following conversation between Chromium developers it's not clear to me whether they consider API itself bad or only their implementation. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!topic/blink-dev/b54nW_mGSVU Any insight welcomed. Jirka -- -- Jirka Kosek e-mail: ji...@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz -- Professional XML consulting and training services DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing -- OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep. -- Bringing you XML Prague conferencehttp://xmlprague.cz --
