Thanks to all,
That would be the standard thing to do.The sooner someone gets started on the feature, the easier it'll be to revert the patch that removes the code. :-)J
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:55 AM, David Levin <levin@chromium.org> wrote:On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Peter Kasting <pkasting@google.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Dmitry Titov <dimich@chromium.org> wrote:I'd lean to the removal, unless there is a port that has work ongoing or planned soon for those implementations.Does anybody vote for #ifdefs?I vote against removal if only because Chromium has really wanted these badly for a long time and simply hasn't been able to find someone to implement them. Perhaps I could make it worth your while to implement rather than remove the stubs? :)Even if someone to implement them for chromium, it doesn't seem to fix the overall problem. Dmitry indicated that the presences of these is breaking feature detection in browsers using WebKit (-- which is something being heard from web developers).A simple solution is to remove them. Later, any port (including chromium) who gets someone to work on them could re-add these methods back properly under ifdef's.dave_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
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