W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2013

RE: Fixes cherry picked this week

From: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 19:08:20 +0000
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
CC: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0e7298a626a64c16900126d7ae50ced6@BLUPR03MB245.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
That's a reasonable request. I'll see about porting the three worker's bugs over today, and I'll check on the other one.

-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@w3.org] 
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 1:02 AM
To: Travis Leithead
Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer; public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Fixes cherry picked this week

On 12/06/2013 19:20 , Travis Leithead wrote:
> The first three only apply to sections of the spec that are built 
> exclusively for the Web Workers spec. Since our process doesn't 
> include or build that document, I didn't think these pieces were 
> necessary to port.

Yes, but everything we don't apply causes the documents to drift farther apart. This makes commits harder to merge over time, leads to really weird bugs on occasion, and makes things like finding differences a lot harder.

So section we absolutely don't care about should absolutely be merged :)

> The last one was specific to a WHATWG spec-effect -- a "security"
> graphical overlay had a bug that this checkin fixes. Our W3C spec 
> doesn't support these spec "extras" AFAIK, so I also skipped that.

Isn't that a fix (or part of one) for this bug: 
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22023 ?

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 14 June 2013 19:08:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:33 UTC