Attacked == people grandstanding, taking turns at telling me ITP was bad although ITP was not the topic, telling me I was stupid, that sort of stuff. It’s by far the most hostile audience I’ve had at a technical presentation.
Also, do the notes really suggest "grandstanding about ITP"? I asked for evidence that the proposed semantics were going to be usable. You can't cleave API style (which is problematic) from semantics that cleanly. APIs have consequences, and they matter.
-
-
If your recollection of the event is that of courtesy and healthy discussion, I’m sorry for your loss of memory.
-
Maybe enough of re-litigating this past event. John, you recall everyone's combined reaction, which included much wrath about ITP itself, which was off-agenda. Tweet didn't single anyone out. Alex may best recall his own comments on Storage Access API only. Rashomon effect?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We did end up changing semantics based on feedback from devs trying to use it. It didn't end up being about placement of the method, other storages, or Permissions API. That said...
-
Cookie access was necessary and sufficient for our known use cases. But covering other storages was the intent, is more elegant, and can be added. Placement of API doesn't matter much, can be changed. Might be exceeding the limits of Twitter to go deeper, can discuss in issue.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.