- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 03:53:01 -0400
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: "S. Moon" <innodb@gmail.com>, "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>, Sangwhan Moon <me@sangwhan.com>
Hi, Art– On 9/18/13 8:05 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > On 9/18/13 5:09 PM, ext Doug Schepers wrote: >> I just made a couple more changes: >> >> 1) I removed the “optional” keyword from the WebIDL, because WebIDL >> says: [[ The final argument in an operation MUST NOT explicitly be >> declared to be optional if the operation is variadic. ]] > > This is OK with me (although this additional constraint doesn't seem > necessary when the final argument is the first argument in when the > operation is variadic). >> >> 2) I removed the “version 1” from the name of the spec, since we >> don't intend to do a v2. > > Well, our plan of record as recorded in > <http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/ToDo#Touch_Events_v2> says we > will produce a v2 version although it will be a WG Note. > > Assuming we still intend to publish the v2 Note, we can of course > eliminate "version 1" from our v1 Recommendation but I'm not sure if > we should or not. Is there a good precedence here? ATM, I don't have > a strong opinion either way. I don't think removing the "version 1" limits us in making a v2 Note (or not), and if we keep it, it could be confusing to developers or implementers whether there's going to be a normative v2. I don't know of a precedent, per se, but most first specs don't include a version number, unless there's intent to do a follow-on. Regards- -Doug
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2013 07:53:10 UTC