Re: RfC: LCWD of W3C DOM4; deadline July 31

   1. The language "nuked from orbit soon" and "will be nuked" needs to be
   rewritten. This level of informality is inappropriate for a W3C REC track
   document. Better to say "expect to be deprecated" or similar.
   2. It is annoying that a search for "Warning!" in the document fails (at
   least on Chrome and Firefox) because it is injected from a content style
   property.
   3. There remains a normative reference to the WHATWG "URL"
   specification, which needs to be resolved before moving to REC. It would be
   well advised to describe the expected process for doing this in the SoTD
   section.



On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
wrote:

> The HTMLWG asked WebApps to review the July 10 LCWD of W3C DOM4:
>
>   <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-dom-20140710/>
>
> This LC addresses eight [Bugs] in the May [CR]. A diff between the CR and
> LC is available at [Diff].
>
> Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback.
>
> If anyone in WebApps wants to propose an official group response, please
> do so ASAP, in reply to this e-mail so the group can discuss it.
>
> Comments should be sent to www-dom @ w3.org by July 31. Presumably, the
> group also welcomes data about "silent reviews", f.ex. "I reviewed section
> N.N and have no comments".
>
> -Thanks, AB
>
> [CR] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-dom-20140508/>
>
> [Bugs] <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?bug_status=
> UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_
> status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&
> bug_status=CLOSED&component=DOM4&list_id=40501&product=
> HTML%20WG&query_format=advanced>
>
> [Diff] <http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%
> 2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2F2014%2FCR-dom-20140508%2F&doc2=http%3A%
> 2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2F2014%2FWD-dom-20140710%2F>
>
>
>
>