> > I'm going to stop replying to this thread going forward since I have other > things to do but please note that my lack of future response does not, in > any way, constitute a lack of signal or acceptance of an argument, idea, or > amendment to the proposal. >
> Apple's WebKit team is against this proposal like we were with the old > API, and that's not going to change unless a substantial amendment is made > to address all of the concerns we've raised thus far (as well as any new > concerns we may raise in the future) for this proposal and the old API. > Thanks for the discussion and for taking a clear stance. I know you were going to stop replying, but so far you have only argued about the `metered` part of the proposal. Any word on the proposed `sustainedSpeed` attribute? One way a vendor could implement this API would be to always report `false` for `metered` (despite the actual value potentially being another) and still report connection speed data via `sustainedSpeed`. Cheers, Tom
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev