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

RE: CfC: publish new WD of XHR; deadline December 5

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 15:44:49 +0000
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6895C7B67488C14AA23F0E079F0D7E8F142765@TK5EX14MBXC284.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
On Thursday, December 01, 2011 5:12 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 13:29:37 +0100, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
> wrote:
> > It appears Adrian is proposing:
> >
> >   .../TR/XMLHttpRequest/  be a WG Note but it's not clear to me what  
> > version of XHR would be used: the 3-Aug-2010 XHR CR, the last ED that  
> > was created, some other version?
> >
> >   .../TR/XMLHttpRequest2/ be used for Anne's merged version and titled  
> > "XMLHttpRequest Level 2".
> >
> > Anne, All - WDYT?
> >
> > Adrian - if there is consensus to do something like the above, would you  
> > commit to doing the editorial work on the WG Note?
> >
> > (FWIW, I think Adrian's proposal is reasonable and it meets the I Can  
> > Live With It Test and if Anne wants the ED to remain version-less,  
> > that's OK, provided L2 is added to versions published in /TR/.)
>
> It seems totally pointless to me, but we can add even more cruft to the  
> TR/ versions, sure. I should probably also add a disclaimer similar to  
> what http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/ has so it is clear TR/ does not represent  
> the latest version.

I don't think it's pointless for the reasons I gave. One of the valuable
aspects of the W3C is the traceability that comes from the archive in TR
space. We have implementations of XHR L1 that, while not 100%, are mostly
conforming deployed with customers.

I am happy to help with whatever work is needed to make this happen. I
haven't reviewed what errata have been added to the CR document in the
editor's draft. If there's nothing significant (and I'd hope there wouldn't
be to a CR document) I think we could just publish the CR document with
appropriate editing as a Note and be done. It's the CR document I'd like
to not leave dangling.

Cheers,

Adrian.
Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 15:45:43 GMT

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