Hi All, Thanks for your valuable inputs regarding Microdata implementation. I have uploaded the patch for basic implementation of document.getItems() DOM API.
Bug id: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68610 Could someone please review the patch, and let me know the review comments. Thanks and regards, Arko Saha On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 3:12 AM, James Robinson <jam...@google.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Charles Pritchard <ch...@jumis.com>wrote: > >> On 9/22/2011 2:13 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011, Dean Jackson wrote: >>> >>>> However, isn't prefixing designed to avoid incompatibilities in spec >>>> changes, not incompatibilities between implementations? Ensuring no >>>> conflicts in implementations doesn't matter too much if the spec >>>> changes. >>>> >>> It's designed to ensure that authors can reliably use a name and expect >>> to >>> get the same result in any UA that supports that name. >>> >>> I'm not going to change the spec in a way that conflicts with that -- if >>> the spec has to change, it'll change either in a compatible way (e.g. to >>> match what was actually implemented), or in a way that doesn't conflict >>> (e.g. by changing the name in the spec). >>> >>> >>> Note I'm not talking about Microdata in particular. I don't even know >>>> what that spec is :) I'm just talking about the general approach. If the >>>> world can guarantee that this spec will never change, then I guess your >>>> technique works. >>>> >>>> FWIW, there is an in-between approach, which is the one used by WebGL. >>>> It defines a prefix that all implementations share. >>>> >>>> canvas.getContext("**experimental-webgl"); >>>> >>> That'll just result in that name becoming the standard. >>> >> >> I would like "some kind" of fast track method for these kind of issues. >> Something like a "Request for dropping prefix" RfDP protocol would be >> super. >> > > Please post this feedback to some thread where it's relevant, not on a > WebKit development mailing list discussion about a specific feature. > > - James > > > >> "RfDP: Microdata". First the spec editor would have to vouch for it, then, >> if Moz, MS, Opera, Apple and Google reps can give a nod within a few weeks, >> we've got something. >> >> I'd really like to avoid repeats of the CSS "-vnd-transform" baggage, >> when possible. >> WebKit went back and forth on BlobBuilder. Now it's at: >> "WebKitBlobBuilder". That was not so fun. >> That's another situation I'd like to avoid. >> >> For this particular method, the microdata section, I'm happy enough >> hearing that the spec editor will vouch for it. >> If that's the precedent, I'll take it. I'd like to learn how we can build >> on that precedent. >> >> Reps from the major vendors have been quite responsive this year. I know >> they can't "commit" to supporting >> an API in a short time frame (such as the File API), but they have been >> great about voicing issues. >> >> >> -Charles >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org >> http://lists.webkit.org/**mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-**dev<http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev> >> > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
