W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

Re: [HTMLWG] CR Exit Criteria redux

From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 22:10:15 -0700
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20120921051015.GA23890@crum.dbaron.org>
On Thursday 2012-09-20 21:38 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> On Sep 20, 2012, at 9:15 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > My interpretation of this is that it has to be shipping in a
> > nightly, preview, or beta release for a month in order to count.
> > 
> > My memory of the motivation for this, in the CSS WG discussions, was
> > that we didn't want to require waiting until something shipped in a
> > final release, but if it hadn't shipped in a final release, we
> > wanted to have a decent indication that it wasn't going to need to
> > be reverted in order to be Web-compatible.
> 
> Makes sense. Do you feel some sort of claim by the implementor that the implementation is sufficiently stable and mature would be an adequate replacement?

Maybe.  I think for things that are well-isolated new features it
might be reasonable, but for things that have any interactions with
existing behavor I think it's worth leaving the one-month rule.

It's worth noting that the worst-case result of having the one-month
rule is that it delays entering PR by one month.  (In the cases
where it delays it longer, I think that's a sign that the feature
was not, in fact, interoperably implementable, and therefore it's
not the worst case.)

-David

-- 
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 05:10:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:34 UTC