Re: Progress event spec

On Jan 27, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Robert Sayre wrote:

>
> On 1/27/07, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com> wrote:
>>
>> The arbritrariness of the value is why I do not feel it should be  
>> in the
>> spec, but left to vendors.
>
> I'd be interested to hear from browser vendors that want to change or
> delete the values in Hixie's proposal.

I think Hixie's proposal is fine as-is, since the requirements are  
SHOULD-level, and therefore if a UA can't meet the time range  
guidelines or has some good reason not to, it won't fail to be  
conformant. On the other hand, this makes them just suggestions, and  
they are hard to reasonably test for, so perhaps they should just be  
a non-normative hint.

Regards,
Maciej