- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 10:07:02 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapi@w3.org
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > > 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 [up invoking Conway's law] > > 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. Pragmatically, why does it matter when the references are finished? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 10:07:43 UTC