W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > May 2008

Re: XHR LC comments

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:03:25 +0200
Message-ID: <482BFC5D.4040300@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapi@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> The problem is that concepts such "origin" and determining the 
>>> encoding of a text/html stream are not defined anywhere else. It's not 
>>> really clear to me what to do about that.
>> In some cases, it may be possible to copy the current definition. In 
>> other cases, it may be possible just not to depend on it (for instance, 
>> by not specifying encoding sniffing).
> 
> I don't have an opinion on the exact issue here, but as a general rule I 
> recommend against making decisions based on the political status (rather 
> than technical status) of working groups and specs. Otherwise we just end 

Not sure what this means.

My understanding was that XHR1 is an intermediate step (documenting the 
current state, and trying to make it more interoperable), while XHR2 
would contain something that is really good.

If this is the case, it's totally pointless to let XHR1 have normative 
references on something that won't be finished for a long time.

> ...

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 09:48:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 15 May 2008 09:48:21 GMT