- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:49:54 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
- cc: Dominic Mazzoni <dmazzoni@google.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>, Mark Sadecki <mark@w3.org>, Jay Munro <jaymunro@microsoft.com>
On Mon, 17 Feb 2014, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote: > > So, are you telling me that the WhatWg will not make its way in to the > W3C spec? I have no idea what this means. > Note: I am not copying anything. I am simply commenting on what was put > in FF. Your e-mail said "One concern I have about the current hit region spec", which suggests you were commenting on a spec, not an implementation. > Also, if you are asking for our input you are asking for our contributions. > As you can see there are problems with the current WhatWG spec. > I did not make the decision to use the WhatWG implementation. What I am asking is that discussions of changes to the WHATWG spec happen in the WHATWG mailing list or on bugs in the WHATWG HTML component, and that the W3C stop forking APIs written at the WHATWG. Posting feedback on this list doesn't result in changes to the WHATWG spec, since this list is about the W3C spec, not the WHATWG spec. I do welcome your input. Please send it to either the WHATWG list, or file bugs on the WHATWG spec: http://whatwg.org/newbug What I do not welcome is another round of the W3C forking technologies maintained by the WHATWG, as was done with the focus APIs. Either: - work with the WHATWG, on the WHATWG list and with the WHATWG product in Bugzilla, referencing the WHATWG spec, etc, or, - invent your own APIs without copying the WHATWG work. The current thing where you take WHATWG work, change it, and publish it, is not acceptable and is actively harming the Web due to the resulting confusion amongst implementors and developers. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 17 February 2014 18:50:22 UTC