W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2012

Re: [selectors-api] RfC: LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline July 19

From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kanghaol@oupeng.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:08:04 +0800
Message-ID: <501FA594.8000903@oupeng.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, WebApps Working Group <public-webapps@w3.org>
(12/07/31 20:06), Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 7/19/12 11:15 PM, ext Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
>> Sorry for my late comment.
>>
>> While I think it's fine to publish LCWD Selectors API as it is, it would
>> be nice if it can address my comment in [1]. By "address", I mean either
>> define the desired behavior or explicitly mark it as undefined (which I
>> think is better than not saying anything because an explicit "undefined"
>> tells a spec reader that relevant discussions can be found in the list).
>>
>> [1]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/thread#msg518
>>
> 
> Lachlan, Kenny - what is the status of this comment (f.ex. does the spec
> need to be changed)?

I think this is a very minor issue, and it has a simple workaround -
mark it as undefined. However, if Lachlan doesn't feel like paying extra
fee for versionning (what Anne calls "make work") or he thinks having
"undefined"s in a spec significantly lowers the quality, I think that's
fair enough and I suggest the way to move forward (if we really want to)
is to consider my comment as retracted (let's just do so if Lachlan
doesn't reply to this).

To address this issue without marking "undefined"s, the way is:

0. Make sure this issue is addressed in css3-syntax (CCed Tab Atkins
since he is the editor).
1. Link to css3-syntax.
2. Write tests for this issue.

but I am not sure if the process will block us at 1. It sure would block
us at 2. if implementations haven't changed last since last time I
tested with this.


Cheers,
Kenny
-- 
Web Specialist, Oupeng Browser, Beijing
Try Oupeng: http://www.oupeng.com/
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 11:08:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:54 GMT