Re: Dropping XMLHttpRequest 1 (just do 2)?

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:35:22 +0100, Giuseppe Pascale <giuseppep@opera.com>  
wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:31:55 +0100, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:19:37 +0100, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>  
>> wrote:
>>> Better yet, dump the "2" version number and just have  
>>> /XMLHttpRequest2/ point to /XMLHttpRequest/.
>>>
>>> Everything in 1 is in 2, so making a big deal out of this is a  
>>> valuable waste of time justifying the decision.
>>>
>>> There is no point in having "Level 1" and "Level 2" since there is no  
>>> "Level 1"… there is just "XMLHttpRequest" :)
>>
>> I favor this approach.
>>
> If that's the case would be possible to replace xhr 1 spec text with xhr  
> 2 text spec and drop 2?
> Any issue in doing that?

I think it is essentially the same thing. If you go to a specific version,  
you get that specific version. If you go to /XMLHttpRequest you get the  
latest version, which is what is in XHR2.

FWIW I would like to have had the resources to finish this spec and park  
it, instead of having the whole lot left unfinished. We don't - both in  
terms of editing, and because the implementations won't match it - XHR1  
changed from documenting what someone did to documenting what we were all  
working towards, and since what we are all working towards (and haven't  
achieved yet) is XHR2, merging them seems like the most sensible and  
helpful way forward.

cheers

-- 
Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan litt norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 16:15:57 UTC