W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [DOM] Name

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:41:10 -0700
Message-ID: <4E664D26.60805@jumis.com>
To: David Flanagan <dflanagan@mozilla.com>
CC: public-webapps@w3.org
On 9/6/11 9:18 AM, David Flanagan wrote:
> On 9/4/11 6:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:12:45 +0200, Arthur Barstow 
>> <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:
>>> The CfC to publish a new WD of DOM Core was blocked by this RfC. I 
>>> will proceed with a  request to publish a new WD of DOM Core in TR/. 
>>> The name DOM Core will be used for the upcoming WD. If anyone wants 
>>> to propose a name change, please start a *new* thread.
>>
>> Given that the specification replaces most of DOM2 and DOM3 I suggest 
>> we name it DOM4, including for the upcoming WD (or alternatively a WD 
>> we publish a couple of weeks later).
>>
>>
> This is an editorial issue, and Anne is the editor. It should be his 
> perogative to name the spec he's put so much work into.  Editing specs 
> is hard work; let's not create needless headaches for the editors. 
> Everyone has had a chance to make their suggestions, now let's just 
> let Anne publish his spec under whatever name he chooses. Its just a 
> name!

I'm not standing in his way, but I can at least point-out that the DOM* 
name has lead to additional work in other specs, such as the web 
messaging specs. It seems like an optimization, to me, as I outlined in 
my prior e-mail.

If it needs to be officially stated (I'm not a w3c member): I'm fine 
with Anne naming his specification DOM Core Level 4, or whatever variant 
of DOM he is looking to publish under.

-Charles
Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 16:41:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:47 GMT