W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2009

Deprecated vs. obsolete

From: Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:56:38 +0200
Message-ID: <AEF1224B489248F2B855977BAAD418FA@kmPC>
To: <www-dom@w3.org>
Dear All,

The definition of deprecated in DOM 3 Events ED is peculiarly different from typical spec usage, within W3C and elsewhere. I believe deprecated should still mean MUST for implementors but SHOULD NOT for authors. The appropriate term encompassing SHOULD NOT for authors and SHOULD NOT or MAY for implementors is obsolete. Furthermore, even in that case SHOULD NOT for implementors seems too strong for me, maybe it should be MAY and strengthened to SHOULD NOT only when there are better replacements already available, not just in progress?

There are features I'm soon going to suggest be deprecated but which for legacy compatibility would need to remain MUST for implementors.

Requiring a complete and superior substitute before lifting MUST from implementors is a good thing. Otherwise an attempt against which I was one of those to protest in the following thread could happen here as well: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2009Mar/0097.html.

Best regards,

Krzysztof
HTML WG
Received on Saturday, 19 September 2009 13:57:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:03 GMT