W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Spec changes for LCs and later maturity levels

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:18:29 +0100
Message-ID: <4EB41055.9020502@gmx.de>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: ext Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 2011-11-04 17:10, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> ...
> The group discussed this on October 31 [1]. The gist of the agreement is
> that since the text that is now in the API spec used to be in the
> protocol spec, the totality of a review of the two specs is effectively
> the same. In this view, the change to the API spec is not substantive.
> ...

Doesn't compute. The text was *removed* from the protocol spec because 
the WG found it to be misleading (suggesting WS URIs are different from 
other URIs). It was *not* removed because we thought it belongs 
somewhere else. Also, in case that wasn't clear, it was *replaced* by 
different text.

>> 2. The substantive issue of whether the text is correct. Julian asked
>> some questions about that, and I'd be curious to see replies (especially
>> because they are related to similar topics in HTML5).
>
> I think we need to continue to move forward and to acknowledge several
> implementations of the API spec have been deployed. As such, I tend to
> think we may have already passed the point of diminishing returns
> regarding minor tweaks to the spec and if there are bugs, in the spec,
> please file bugs and we can address them during CR.
> ...

Right now, the spec "uses" an algorithm without actually referring to 
it. A *minimal* fix is to make that a proper reference.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 4 November 2011 16:25:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:48 GMT