Anne van Kesteren wrote: > There have been a lot of messages about referencing HTML5 and how we can > mitigate that. I don't think that copying the text from HTML5 is an > option. The Window specification is fairly complex and especially the > interaction with browsing contexts is a complex bit of HTML5 that I > don't feel confident taking over. The same goes for defining the origin > policy. > > If someone were to volunteer to define these outside of HTML5 we could > refer to that specification but so far that has not happened. > > So we have two reasonable options I think: > > 1) Keep the references intact. > > 2) Make various things implementation defined and hint with > non-normative notes that this will be defined by HTML5 in the future. > > Option two would be feasible but implementors have actually requested > that we define in detail how URIs are resolved and what exactly the > same-origin policy implies for XMLHttpRequest. I don't think it's worth > dropping all that work on the floor. If you decide to keep the references, I don't see how this document can advance. Not sure how it works in W3C land, but in IETF land you simply can't have a normative reference to something that is work in progress. BR, JulianReceived on Friday, 16 May 2008 09:52:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 16 May 2008 09:52:02 GMT