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

Re: XHR LC comments

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 09:03:12 +0200
Message-ID: <482D31B0.3070004@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapi@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
>> ...in which case I'd say that (a) the references aren't normative after 
>> all, and (b) the spec itself can't be normative as it is written.
> 
> I don't mind calling the references "informative" if that's what it takes. 
> I'm not sure what practical difference it would make.

You can't make them informative by just saying so. The question is, do I 
need material from HTML5 to implement a conforming XHR implementation? 
If yes, then XHR can't be published earlier. If no, let's rephrase stuff 
so that HTML5 isn't required.

>>> practice, take anything away from the ability to get interoperable 
>>> implemenations of the feature described in XHR1.
>> Really?
>>
>> What if Apple implements the thing as defined by HTML5-as-of-2008, and 
>> Microsoft as defined in HTML5-as-of-2009?
>>
>> If it matters, then it's a problem. If it doesn't matter, leave it out 
>> of the XHR spec, as apparently, it's irrelevant for the goal it's trying 
>> to achieve.
> 
> The point is that Apple and Microsoft are both going to implement the 
> thing as required by the Web in 2000, not as defined in HTML5. HTML5 is 
> describing existing practice on these matters, not defining new material. 

Well, in that case pull that stuff out of HTML5 and insert it into the 
XHR spec (or move it into something that can be published separately).

BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 16 May 2008 07:06:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 16 May 2008 07:06:03 GMT