W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2013

Re: [Promises/Futures] Media Capture Task Force call

From: Tab Atkins <tabatkins@google.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:31:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CACwK9geRNnJH8RBxnKbkNb-RjEjqw3QdFAS_karZgDYYGmftaw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
Cc: Stefan HÃ¥kansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Stefan HÃ¥kansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> On 6/12/13 5:25 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
>>> There's no owner for the DOM spec right now, so it's not clear what that
>>> statement is meant to imply. Practically speaking, both Chrome and FF
>>> are implementing now and the design is done.
>>
>> For me it is a problem if there is no owner for the spec right now. I
>> think there should be a W3C document describing Promises the Media
>> Capture/WebRTC references.
>
> I'll leave that question for Anne to address.

You don't need a W3C spec for references.  Anyone who tells you that
is a liar.  ^_^

Promises are defined by the DOM standard, currently being editted by
Anne in the WHATWG: <http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#promises>

>> And I assume that pushing this through the W3C process could mean changes.
>
> I don't think so. It's a small contract, and we've bike-shedded it to death
> in the CSS and public-script-coord threads as well as a pre-standards debate
> that was months-long with the various people who are stakeholders in the
> Promises community. It will be this particular pantone version of this
> particular color forever.
>
> CC-ing some folks who can give you more insight into that statement.

Agreed.  There was some argument over the syntax and semantics when it
first emerged from sub rose development, but that's all been settled,
and all major players are happy.  Promises aren't going to be a W3C
deliverable anyway - they live on the JS side of things, and so will
be handled by TC39.  We're defining them in DOM right now solely
because the next version of JS, ES6, is already closed for new
features, and ES7's timetable is too long for us to wait for.  TC39 is
well aware of our definitions, though, and has been deeply involved in
making sure it's what they'll want to eventually adopt.

So, don't worry, be happy.  The spec algos are still undergoing
bugfixing, but the surface area is settled and sufficiently stable to
use in specs today.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 18:32:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:20 UTC