[webkit-dev] New feature announcement - Implement HTML5 Microdata in WebKit

[Ryosuke Niwa]

Given that Gecko is implementing the unprefixed getItems (see
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591467), I don't see benefits
in implementing with webkit prefix. Also, it's still under a compile-time
flag so we can prefix it before enabling the flag by default if we strongly
feel like it.

- Ryosuke

On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Charles Pritchard <chuck at 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.
>
> "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 at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/**mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-**dev<http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20111012/49bc666e/attachment.html>