W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > April 2008

RE: postMessage feedback

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:06:12 +0000 (UTC)
To: Sunava Dutta <sunavad@windows.microsoft.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, IE8 Core AJAX SWAT Team <ieajax@microsoft.com>, "public-html-comments@w3.org" <public-html-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0804282019470.2099@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Sunava Dutta wrote:
> 
> I followed the threads and mentioned that I’d touch base with my team 
> and get back with our position. 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Apr/0029.html 
> However, it seems that my comment here has been overlooked.

Actually that e-mail was carefully considered when I responded to the 
postMessage() feedback, as you can see by searching for "I agree with 
Jonas." in my reply:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Apr/0753.html

Is there a part of the message that I overlooked? I apologise if that is 
the case; let me know what it is you would like changed in the spec and I 
will look at it again.


> I’m aware we’ve been having discussions on the topic but changing 
> the spec took me by surprise.

Discussions usually lead to changes. :-)


> We want to get the latest technology out to the web developer as soon as 
> possible with cross document messaging. That said, for browsers it is 
> challenging enough given that it’s a draft and consequently a work in 
> progress. Having associated timelines/expectations set regarding changes 
> and updates would be really helpful.
>
> In addition, can we have an email to the group with a list of topics for 
> cross document messaging that are being discussed/in flux and the 
> (tentative) timelines for resolving them?

At this point the spec is pretty stable. There is no outstanding feedback, 
and there are no known issues (other than a minor one to do with the 
serialisation of origin tuples, but the example shows how that is supposed 
to look).

The status of each section in the spec is given by the annotation at the 
start of the section in the spec, the documentation for which is here:

   http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/status-documentation.html

For example, the Cross-Document Messaging section:

   http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#crossDocumentMessages

...has the status "Awaiting implementation feedback", which is defined to 
mean "The section is basically done, but might change in response to 
feedback from implementors. Major changes are unlikely past this point 
unless it is found that the feature, as specified, really doesn't work 
well". As you can see from the annotation, all the browsers are marked as 
implementing the feature to some extent.

(By the way, the icon I was using for IE recently changed to be some sort 
of sun icon. If you have a 16x16 icon I should use instead, please let me 
know. The same goes for Opera and Safari, both of which right now have 
icons that aren't 16x16 or that aren't ideal for some reason.)

The list of pending feedback is here:

   http://www.whatwg.org/issues/

Cheers,
-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 21:07:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:13:58 GMT