W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2008

Re: [whatwg] Parsing, syntax, and content model feedback

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:04:26 +0000 (UTC)
To: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Cc: www-archive@w3.org, scampa.giovanni@gmail.com
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0812290527210.12643@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, Garrett Smith wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Giovanni Campagna
> >> <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > XMLHttpRequest was invented by Netscape, now it is a W3C Technical 
> >> > Report (I don't remember what maturity level). The same with so 
> >> > called DOM level 0 (now HTML5)
> >>
> >> No, sorry, that's not true.
> >
> > XHR was invented by Microsoft. Other than that the statement is true.
> No, it is not true. XHR came from Microsoft and was copied in Mozilla 
> (using a constructor, not a factory). Mozilla-based releases of Netscape 
> of course *had* the implementation of Mozilla.

XMLHttpRequest was invented by Microsoft; now it is a W3C Technical 
Report. DOM level 0 was invented by various browser vendors, and is now 
mostly defined in HTML5.

> > In general when posting to the WHATWG list please consider whether 
> > your statement actually adds anything to the discussion, in 
> > particular, whether it adds anything of importance to the development 
> > of the spec. In this case, as far as I can tell it did not make any 
> > difference to the spec.
> If something is factually false, it ought to be pointed out.

I encourage you to consider whether the falsehood of a statement actually 
affects the specification before pointing it out. There's really no reason 
to point out an error on the WHATWG list if the error is academic and 
doesn't affect the specification.

> I think the same poster posted that undefined != undefined in another 
> thread.  If an arguments is to be based on facts, the truthfulness of 
> those facts weighs heavily in consideration of its validity.

I agree that for issues that affect the development of the spec, accuracy 
is important. However, the history of who invented what really isn't one 
of those issues.

> As far as 'adding importance to the development of the spec', I've done 
> that. Please see the "Misconceptions Documented" thread.

The point is that _all_ posts to the WHATWG list should be of use to the 
development of the spec.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 29 December 2008 07:05:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:43:27 UTC