Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Section on polyfills and prollyfills #3

Closed
marcoscaceres opened this issue Jun 6, 2013 · 9 comments
Closed

Section on polyfills and prollyfills #3

marcoscaceres opened this issue Jun 6, 2013 · 9 comments

Comments

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Contributor

The AWWW should include a section about polyfills that describes the role that those have in keeping the Web usable for millions of people - particularly with regards to jQuery, and the ability to override native functionality to correct browser bugs. This should include guidance on how APIs should be designed to be polyfillable.

There should also be a mention of prollyfills and their role in evolving the Web platform in a backwards/future compatible way.

@torgo
Copy link
Member

torgo commented Jun 28, 2013

As discussed on yesterday's call, agreed. Who would be willing to take an action to do this?

@torgo
Copy link
Member

torgo commented Jul 2, 2013

Are we really going with "prollyfills" by he way?

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's not really up to us. It's terminology being used by the community... of course, it started as a bit of a joke, but the distinction between a polyfill and prollyfill is becoming more solid in people's minds now.

See discussion happening here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-nextweb/2013Jul/0026.html

@torgo
Copy link
Member

torgo commented Jul 2, 2013

Recognize it's not our call but I'm worried about proliferation of more insey jargon as opposed to straight-forward names that travel well across languages and cultures. Don't want to wade into the discussions on public-nextweb until I wrap my head around the topic some more. In the mean time, what would be good to discuss here might be the scope of the AWWW section on polyfills. Should the AWWW adendum also contain a section on web components?

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Contributor Author

It could, but it's hard to discuss web components in the context of the web at large as they are not very prolific yet. As an enabler of extensibility, however, it might be good to discuss them... but we don't know yet if they are good or not because not that many developers are using them (could turn into a complete unforeseen disaster... not that that's ever happened with Web stuff before, just sayin;) )

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Contributor Author

BTW, I understand what you are saying about poly/prolyfills. We don't need to speak in terms of them, but at least acknowledge that those techniques are colloquially referred to as such. I'm sure other communities use similar techniques to work around platform versions, etc.

@torgo
Copy link
Member

torgo commented Sep 28, 2017

We created a finding on this topic.

@torgo torgo closed this as completed Sep 28, 2017
@dbaron
Copy link
Member

dbaron commented Sep 28, 2017

@Aleksandr14881
Copy link

Ну как то так

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants