Andrew Overholt wrote: > 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 like to see us document this so everyone can easily find > our stance in this area, similar to how they can with Blink [2]. > > I've put a draft here: > > https://wiki.mozilla.org/User:Overholt/APIExposurePolicy
Please make the following clarifications: 1. Please explicitly state that this is intended to be a policy of the DOM module and that it is not intended to apply to other modules. 2. If/when this is published, please publish this under https://wiki.mozilla.org/DOM: on the wiki to further clarify that. 3. Please explicitly state that, although the DOM module may choose to work according to this policy with respect to web APIs that expose other modules' functionality to web content through JavaScript, this policy doesn't apply to the the other modules' work. For example, the DOM exposes some functionality called XMLHttpRequest that allows JavaScript code to make HTTP requests; the policy would apply to the XMLHTTPRequest API itself but not to the underlying network protocols. In particular, the Necko module would be free to work under a different--perhaps wildly opposing--policy as far as the design and implementation of the network protocols are concerned. These clarifications would greatly help me (and probably owners and peers of other modules) scope our participation in this discussion. As far as the DOM module is concerned, I am mostly part of the peanut gallery so my judgement of whether this is a good idea is not so important. I generally trust the DOM module owner and peers to do the right thing for their module anyway. At the same time, I doubt such a policy is necessary or helpful for the modules that I am owner/peer of (PSM/Necko), at least at this time. In fact, though I haven't thought about it deeply, most of the recent evidence I've observed indicates that such a policy would be very harmful if applied to network and cryptographic protocol design and deployment, at least. But, let's not derail this discussion of DOM module policy with further discussions of things for which it is not relevant. Cheers, Brian _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
