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 12:11:29 +0200
Message-ID: <482C0C51.3030809@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapi@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
>> 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?

The spec can't be more "ready" than all normative references.

If these aren't getting ready in time, then I'm not sure why XHR1 needs 
to be on the W3C REC track at all.

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 10:12:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:26 UTC