W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: publish a new Working Draft of DOM Core; comment deadline March 2

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:45:09 -0800
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Michael Champion <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>
Message-id: <B7A7BCFE-ADF8-4462-8CF2-B1DCCF2C00E6@apple.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>

On Feb 24, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:

> Hi, Anne-
> 
> I object to publishing a Working Draft of the DOM Core spec that includes DOM Events.
> 
> Introducing conflicting specifications that cover the same materials dramatically harms interoperability, and the idea of "competing specifications" is an anti-pattern when it comes to standardization.
> 
> If there are changes that you want to the DOM3 Events spec, and if you get the support of the browser vendors to make those changes, then I am happy to change the spec; I'm not married to the spec as it exists, but that is the result of what the last few years of discussing it with the browser vendors and users has resulted in.  Please simply raise the individual issues on the www-dom mailing list for discussion.  So far, I've seen no support on the list for adding events to DOM Core.
> 
> Finally, at TPAC, when we discussed working on DOM Core and DOM 3 Events "in parallel", we did not agree to adding events to DOM Core; in fact, we agreed to exactly the opposite: you wanted to move mutation events into DOM Core in a thinly-veiled attempt to remove them completely (rather than simply deprecate them as is done in DOM3 Events), and all the browser vendors disagreed with that.  Claiming otherwise is simply an attempt to rewrite history.
> 
> So, in summary: please remove section 4, Events, from DOM Core before publishing it as a Working Draft, for now.  After serious discussion, if the group agrees, we can always add them back later, but I would prefer to change DOM3 Events to seeing conflicting specifications.

I recall that we discussed putting core event support into DOM Core, so that it could be a unified Web-compatible successor to both DOM Level 3 Core and DOM Level 3 Events. Many specific reasons were given why it's better to define events together with the core instead of separately. I don't think we had agreement to leave events out of DOM Core. 

I believe what implementors present at TPAC agreed to is that we do not like mutation events and want them to die in a fire.

I can't recall the details beyond that, I would have to check the minutes.

For what it's worth, I (still) think it makes sense to define DOM Core and the central parts of DOM Events together (not necessarily the individual event names and interfaces though). They are not really logically separate.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 07:46:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:43 GMT