W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-coremob@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Rough first draft of Level 0

From: Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 16:51:25 +0000
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-coremob@w3.org" <public-coremob@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CB9E5397.741F0%tobie@fb.com>
On 4/1/12 3:41 PM, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>The documents says that a UA  MUST support:
>
>"XHTML served as application/xhtml+xml"
>
>Yes, Opera's MAMA report states that:
>
>"Of the 3,509,180 URLs that MAMA analyzed, the vast majority (~99.9%)
>used a "text/html" MIME type (see full frequency table). "text/plain" and
>"application/xhtml+xml" types also had some occasional representation in
>the set (~1,000 cases each)."
>http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/mama-http-headers/
>
>XHTML is statistically insignificant, so why bother mandating its support
>as a MUST?   
>
>----
>The document says "Codecs are evil. Thoughts?"
>
>Codecs are not evil. Codecs that are employed as a tool to degrade
>copyright law by misguided patent holders and governments (plus a
>severely broken patent system) is what constitutes "evil" or better put
>"an embarrassment". As Thomas Jefferson put it:
>
>"Considering the exclusive right to invention as given not of natural
>right, but for the benefit of society, I know well the of drawing a line
>between the difficulty things which are worth to the public the
>embarrassment of an exclusive patent, and those which are not." [1] page
>21.   
>
>So, please don't confuse things. Maybe just note that "some codecs are
>patent-encumbered and may require prohibitive payment of royalties to
>certain parties. Thoughts?". It is within the patent's holders' right to
>demand licensing feeds - a necessary and legally valid evil for the life
>of the patent.  
>
>----
>The document says:
>"User agents must support ECMAScript ed3 [ECMA-262] in full, plus all the
>parts from ed5 that can be shimmed, including native JSON."
>
>This is an aspirational document/wish-list (probably shouldn't even use
>RFC2119 language), just say MUST support ECMAScript5. It's not really
>different from mandating user agents MUST support specs that are in their
>early stages of development, like Selectors API Level 2 (which is a FPWD).

Marcos, may I ask you to open up GitHub issues[1] for the above? Or even
better, pull requests!

Thanks,

--tobie

[1]: https://github.com/coremob/level-0/issues
Received on Sunday, 1 April 2012 16:51:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 19 April 2013 17:36:46 UTC