W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Web Storage's Normative References and PR / REC

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:04:15 -0500
Message-ID: <5138C88F.9040308@nokia.com>
To: ext Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 3/7/13 8:52 AM, ext Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 07:28 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> Yves, Philippe,
>>
>> WebApps agreed via [CfC] to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Web
>> Storage [CR] (implementation report is [ImplReport]). The CR has three
>> normative W3C references that are not yet Recommendations: DOMCore WD,
>> HTML5 CR and WebIDL CR. As such, we need you to clarify the implications
>> of these references re publishing a Web Storage PR and REC.
>>
>> As I understand it, the Consortium's Process Document is actually silent
>> regarding maturity level of normative references. However, the Team
>> enforces - with some very specific exceptions - a reference policy via
>> "transition rules" ([TransRules]), in particular:
>>
>> [[
>> Note: In general, documents do not advance to Recommendation with
>> normative references to W3C specifications that are not yet Recommendations.
>> ]]
>>
>> I _think_ the various processes and policies permit the Web Storage PR
>> to be published with the normative references in their current status.
>> Is this true?
> I believe that you are indeed correct.

OK, then I will send a transition request for PR.

>> However, for the REC to be published, we can either wait until all of
>> the normative references are PRs themselves or we can ask the Director
>> for "exceptions". In case we want to pursue this later exception route,
>> would you please explain, what exactly the group would need to do for
>> each of these references?
> The goal is to demonstrate that the materials referenced are stable and
> any change to those references won't have an impact on the
> recommendations.
>
> For HTML5, by demonstrating that the concepts and features from HTML5
> that are used are stable. One can do so by evaluating the referrences
> and providing HTML5 tests for the features.

I do recall HTML5 being one of the specs that was granted an exception 
to the references policy (with the proviso you state above) but I don't 
think WebApps has done this "evaluating". If you are aware of any 
PRs/RECs that have done that evaluation/testing, please provide an 
URL(s) to the documentation.

WebApps - if you are willing to lead or help this `evaluating and 
testing`, please let us know.

> For WebIDL, the Web Applications Working Group advised the Director
> that, by providing idlharness.js tests and demonstrating their support,
> it would enough to demonstrate that the WebIDL syntax used in the
> specifications was stable and well understood.

[Oh right ;-).]

WebApps - if you are willing to lead or help with the idlharness 
testing, please let us know. FYI, a couple of RECs have already done this:

Navigation Timing 
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-navigation-timing-20121217/>
<http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/approved/navigation-timing/html5/idlharness.html>

High Resolution Timing <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-hr-time-20121217/>
<http://w3c-test.org/webperf/tests/approved/HighResolutionTime/idlharness.html>

> Hope this helps,

The above was helpful but I'm wondering about WebStorage's normative 
reference to DOMCore WD. If we do the same type of evaluation and 
testing for DOMCore that is needed for HTML5, will that be sufficient to 
move the spec to REC?

-Thanks, ArtB
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 17:04:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT