W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Obsolescence notices on old specifications, again

From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:00:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CANMdWTvQLXxW7M=O1GVrpo=+kVPy5twFGggi94hOfay71sGStA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Cc: Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
I support adding warnings. As far as I know, all major browser vendors are
using the more modern version of each of these specs for implementation
work. That's certainly true for WebKit at least. It doesn't help anyone to
look at outdated specs considering them to be the latest and greatest when
the vast majority of implementations no longer match them.

Ojan

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:

> I object to adding such notice until all of the proposed replacement specs
> reach REC status.
>
> G.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The recent message to www-dom about DOM2HTML [1] made me realize that we
>> still haven't added warnings to obsolete DOM specifications to hopefully
>> avoid that people use them as a reference.
>>
>> I propose that we add a pointer to the contemporary specification to the
>> following specifications:
>>
>> * DOM 2 Core (DOM4)
>> * DOM 2 Views (HTML)
>> * DOM 2 Events (D3E)
>> * DOM 2 Style (CSSOM)
>> * DOM 2 Traversal and Range (DOM4)
>> * DOM 2 HTML (HTML)
>> * DOM 3 Core (DOM4)
>>
>> and a recommendation against implementing the following specifications:
>>
>> * DOM 3 Load and Save
>> * DOM 3 Validation
>>
>> Hearing no objections, I'll try to move this forward.
>>
>> Ms2ger
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/www-dom/2012JanMar/**0011.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2012JanMar/0011.html>
>>
>>
>
Received on Monday, 23 January 2012 19:01:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT