Re: After 5

Hi Adrian,

On 16/09/2014 23:12 , Adrian Roselli wrote:
>> From: Jirka Kosek [mailto:jirka@kosek.cz] Although I'm far from
>> being fan of "Living Standard" approach, "Fixed Standard" is not
>> good enough -- you need to know what parts of standard are widely
>> implemented and thus are ready to use. Developer needs simple table
>> where he/she can easily check whether he can safely use feature or
>> not. He doesn't care whether feature is defined in HTML spec,
>> Canvas spec or any other spec. He cares whether it's safe to use
>> feature on project for client who still uses IE8.
>
> I have to ask, but isn't that outside of the scope of the W3C? Or at
> least this WG? Isn't the job here to define specs, not to track and
> report on which UA supports which spec and how well?

It is out of the scope of this WG in the sense that this WG isn't 
responsible for the whole Web Platform Tests project. But this WG is, at 
least theoretically, a stakeholder in that project and has an obligation 
to produce tests for it. So it's a question worth asking.

> I rely on sites like Can I Use or research like PPK's to tell me what
> is supported across UAs. I don't come to W3C specs for that.

The goal isn't to replace CanIUse, but rather to publish high-quality, 
fine-grained test results for our specs. CIU is nice but it is in places 
woefully incomplete. If CIU wants to take our data and slap a nice 
interface in front of them, that's great.

Also, the kind of in-depth analysis that PPK does is probably beyond 
what a test suite can achieve, but I would hope that when we publish the 
data it makes his life easier in producing such research.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2014 10:16:14 UTC