W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Process Re: Worker Threads and Site Security Policy

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:35:06 -0700
Cc: Webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, aa@google.com, Ben Turner <bturner@mozilla.com>, Johnny Stenback <jst@mozilla.com>, Brandon Sterne <bsterne@mozilla.com>, chris.wilson@microsoft.com, dveditz@mozilla.com
Message-Id: <471D9C13-8330-420C-80E8-1E7C0043E36B@apple.com>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>


On Jun 25, 2008, at 2:54 PM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

>
> CC trimmed a bit for people I know are in the list without looking.  
> Sadly Microsoft still haven't got around to joining, so it falls on  
> Chris to pass this on until they get to do the legal work.
>
> NB: The chairs are actually Art and I - Doug and Mike are the staff  
> contacts.
>
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:48:04 +0200, Arun Ranganathan  
> <arun@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> Maciej,
>>
>>>> 1. Worker Threads in Script.
>>>
>>> Apple is interested in a worker API. The key issues for workers,  
>>> in my opinion, are security, messaging, and which of the normal  
>>> APIs are available. Right now, these things are covered in HTML5,  
>>> so I think that may be a better place to add a Worker API.
> ...
>
>> Fair observation.  I'll wait to hear from other parties  
>> (particularly the other user-agent companies) about where this  
>> ought to live.  I note from a previous thread[1] that the  
>> presumption of a dependency on HTML5 has proven problematic to  
>> other WGs, which could sell your point about moving this to HTML5.   
>> My preference is to have it here since it is a Web API and thus  
>> should be treated as a modular piece of the ecosystem.
>
> I note that in the geolocation discussion Ian has been quite vocal  
> about this being the home for APIs, but in respect to the Window  
> spec he has simply taken it into HTML5, although that won't be  
> stable for many years according to him. So clearly the question of  
> where things live is not always one with an obvious answer.

I don't think it is accurate to say that Ian has "taken [Window] into  
HTML5". Here is the history, to the best of my recollection:

1) HTML5 was the first specification ever to define the Window object  
and related "DOM Level 0" features, and it did so before the Web API  
WG even existed.
2) The Web API WG wanted to split the Window portions of HTML5 into a  
standalone spec that could be referenced from multiple other  
specifications. I was the editor for this work, and got pretty far,  
including a start at a test suite.
3) I didn't have the time to keep up with the spec, and found that  
some details had very complex interrelationships with other parts of  
the HTML5 spec.
4) After waiting for some time, Ian continued to maintain the Window- 
related parts of the HTML5 spec.

I still think it would be better overall for Window to be in a  
separate spec, but the work is more challenging than it may seem. Ian  
has acted in good faith in this regard, and the reason this effort  
failed is more my fault than anyone else's.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2008 22:35:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:26 GMT