On Dec 6, 2012, at 16:33 , Axel Hecht wrote: > On 07.12.12 01:08, Asa Dotzler wrote: >> On 12/3/2012 2:39 PM, Norbert Lindenberg wrote: >>> Well, the first question is what size increase would be acceptable >>> given the benefits that ICU provides. >> >> I don't understand what benefits this actually provides. How are users' >> online lives improved by this change, either today or in the future? >> >> Adding to the download size costs us in user acquisition so we cannot be >> OK with taking on megabytes of additional download size for features of >> questionable value. > > I think there are folks outside of mozilla that have been evaluating the app > development, and then said "to make metro a compelling ecosystem for js apps, > we need at least X apis for internationalized Y". That's what's shaping the > js i18n api. Nobody ever said that literally, but it's been inbetween every > two lines.
"Metro" seems to imply Microsoft. While Microsoft has actively participated in the development of this API, it was Google that kicked off the project, and the API differs from similar functionality in the Windows 8 JavaScript API. > I don't think it serves us good to debate the necessity of the API. > > I think that other competitors implement this for the languages they have on > the device, not so much for the languages on the web. Google Chrome is bundling ICU, so they're not limited by what's on the device. > I think this is a challenge for us, and our approach to languages on the web > in general. But I do think it's essential that we take on that challenge and > win. Agreed. Norbert _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
