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

Re: Obsolescence notices on old specifications, again

From: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:19:11 -0800
Message-Id: <D87B0B01-EE20-469C-864C-48C5380ABA3D@jumis.com>
Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
We have the same issue on the other side of it-- new specs that we're cautioned against using.

Let's allow for co-existence. Silly folk like me can work with new Web Apis, and be berated for it, and other folk can use old standards, and be berated for it. Everybody wins!

-Charles



On Jan 23, 2012, at 1:03 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>> I work in an industry where devices are certified against final
>> specifications, some of which are mandated by laws and regulations. The
>> current DOM-2 specs are still relevant with respect to these certification
>> processes and regulations.
>> 
>> I do not object to adding an informative, warning notice to the status
>> sections of these docs that new work is underway to replace, and eventually
>> formally obsolete older DOM RECs. However, until replacement specs exist
>> that have achieved sufficient maturity (namely, REC status), it would not be
>> appropriate to formally obsolete the existing DOM specs.
> 
> We have repeated evidence that pretending these specs aren't obsolete
> and useless hurts web implementors and authors.  We're targeting the
> web with our specs, so that's extremely relevant for us, more so than
> non-web industries dealing with personal regulatory issues.
> 
> Ignoring the regulatory issues for a moment, the non-web industries
> harm themselves (or rather, the down-level authors writing content for
> the things those industries are producing) by attempting to use these
> obsolete specs as well, since they'll be producing things that don't
> match the public web.
> 
> But really, the important thing is just that these specs are hurting
> the web, and our primary focus is the web.
> 
> ~TJ
> 
Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 01:19:36 GMT

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