W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > October 2009

Re: [XHR] Last Call comment on about dependencies

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:46:06 +0200
To: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
Cc: "XHTML2 WG" <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u1hne4c864w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:47:55 +0200, Steven Pemberton  
<steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply. (We are assuming that this is not a formal reply  
>  from the webapps WG.)

I'm not sure if I replied to this already. We meanwhile published a draft  
and will probably do a formal Last Call later on, but it seemed good to  
wrap this up.

In general I believe we do not have formal replies though the WG is  
expected to vet the Disposition of Comments and participate in the  
discussions. In this case however this does not matter anymore.

>>> [... about removing the HTML5 dependency ...]
>>> Our request is that this dependency be removed (or that the connection  
>>> be made informative instead of normative) so that all interested  
>>> constituents can take advantage of this important interface as soon as  
>>> possible.
>> I don't think this is possible. Feel free to go through the  
>> public-webapi mailing list archives to find more detailed discussion on  
>> this subject if you feel the above is not sufficient:
> There seem to be several options:
> 1. XMLHttpRequest is irrevocably bound to HTML5.
>     If that is the case then there seems to be no reason to develop this  
> spec outside of the HTML5 WG, or indeed for developing as a separate  
> spec.

It mostly reuses concepts defined by HTML5. It is not the case that it  
needs to be a single document to ensure some kind of consistency as you  
would want with e.g. the HTML5 parser algorithm and script execution.

> 2. XMLHttpRequest is host neutral, and therefore can be used in  
> different environments.
>     If that is the case, and it would seem preferable since there are  
> several other technologies that are able to use this, then it seems good  
> to make it as widely adoptable as possible. It seems like there are two  
> ways to do this:
>     a. copy the restrictions due to HTML5 into this document, so that it  
> is free-standing
>     b. remove the restrictions due to HTML5, and ensure that they are  
> added to that spec, and let languages that use it specify the necessary  
> restrictions needed to make it work in that environment.

I think you can use it in other contexts now by defining what the  
XMLHttpRequest origin and XMLHttpRequest base URL are. You still need to  
implement the relevant parts of HTML5 that are referenced to be fully  
conforming of course.

An example of a specification that does this is Web Workers:


> There seem to be several technologies in W3C that could use  
> XMLHttpRequest; SMIL and XForms come readily to mind. Would you be able  
> to enumerate what it is in XMLHttpRequest that is so bound to HTML5?

It is enumerated in the terminology section basically:


Kind regards,

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 15:46:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:30:32 UTC