Re: WebIDL Spec Status

On Tue, 24 Jun 2014, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 6/24/14, 1:05 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
> > Such device certification regimes cannot work unless the referenced 
> > specifications are locked down and clearly implementable.
> 
> I see.
> 
> So this is not about actual spec implementations or spec authors but 
> effectively about a QA cycle that compares the implementations to the 
> specs, and which needs to know which spec to compare the implementations 
> to.

Compraing implementations to anything but the very latest draft is not 
only a waste of time, it's actively harmful to interoperability. At no 
point should any implementor even remotely consider making a change from 
implementing what is currently specified to what was previously specified, 
that would literally be going backwards.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 02:28:25 UTC