Re: ***DHSPAM*** Re: Extensibility strategies, was: Deciding in public (Was: SVGWG SVG-in-HTML proposal)

[[ ***DHSPAM*** ??? ]]?

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote on 08/06/2008 03:06:59 PM:
>
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > >
> > > You did not actually provide such a proposal, leading me to question
> > > whether you truly want this issue addressed.
> >
> > I played that game for many months, leading to a concrete proposal over
a
> > year ago.
>
> URI?

http://intertwingly.net/blog/2007/08/02/HTML5-and-Distributed-Extensibility

> Did it receive feedback?

Yes, including

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Sep/0501.html

> Did you try to take that feedback into
> account to make the proposal address everyone's use cases?

It really isn't productive to go there.  The feedback was inconsistent,
often sarcastic, and generally attempted to put a higher bar in place for
this requirement than for other features that are in the spec.

Suffice it to say that I now see some potential promise for the proposal
that you have outlined.  I'm not yet convinced that it is usable enough for
people to actually consider trying it, but if it does end up getting
documented and used (which may involve tweaking the proposal), I can see it
as the basis for closing issue 41..

> > I agree with you that it is time for the chairs to weigh in.
>
> Ok.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

- Sam Ruby