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

Re: [HTMLWG] CR Exit Criteria redux

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 08:46:10 -0700
Cc: "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <C9E84DF8-35AC-43BB-834F-3CDA7DAC5706@apple.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>

On Sep 25, 2012, at 2:53 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> 
>> == judgment level
>> 
>> For features that are well known to be widely implemented and deployed, the Working Group will assume effective real-world interoperability without testing.
> 
> This scares me when it comes to features that are widely implemented
> and deployed but for which we don't know how well the spec text
> matches the implementations (even worse if we don't know that we don't
> know). For example, browsing contexts and history are widely
> implemented and deployed, but it's very likely that if someone
> implemented the spec, the resulting implementation would be
> Web-compatible.

If you don't believe that the "browsing contexts" and "history" sections (for example) match the spec, despite apparent real-world interoperability, then I think it would be reasonable to mark those as at-risk features.


To account for such cases explicitly, how about:

---------

== judgment level

For features that are well known to be widely implemented and deployed, and where implementations are believed to match the specification, the Working Group will assume effective real-world interoperability without testing.
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 15:47:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 25 September 2012 15:47:15 GMT