W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: WebIDL: how to address the various audiences and constraints?

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:43:10 +0200
Cc: public-script-coord@w3.org, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Mike Smith <mike@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Message-Id: <FDD3473C-4130-4622-AE94-A39723F22182@berjon.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
On Sep 29, 2009, at 21:20 , Cameron McCormack wrote:
> As for having a simplified version first including only what’s needed
> for those specs that need Web IDL done quickly, maybe.  HTML5 is by  
> far
> the biggest user of the esoteric ECMAScript features.  I guess I would
> like to know, for the authors of dependent specs, how quickly they  
> need
> Web IDL done.


WebApps has a document in LC that depends on it (Widgets 1.0: The  
widget interface), and it's a really trivial document to test — we  
don't expect it to be long before we can transition, but it is  
blocking on its dependency on WebIDL. I'd say it's at most one month  
before its progress is hampered by process alone.

It's too early to tell but DAP has some low-hanging fruits that I  
would expect it to be possible to make quick progress on (famous last  
words — I know). Here we're looking at a 3-6 months window.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 09:43:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:02 UTC