Re: [XBL] Address Extensibility in XBL 2.0

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Karl Dubost wrote:
> Le 26 oct. 2006 à 19:42, Dean Jackson a écrit :
> > On 06/10/2006, at 9:06 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the only extension mechanism allowed. Other extensions would 
> > > make a UA non-conformant. Content that uses the mechanism described 
> > > above would be non-conformant. The only reason this is mentioned at 
> > > all is to avoid two implementations using the same attribute name 
> > > for that feature.
> 
> I still think it is good to remind people in an Extension section.

Ok, I've added an Extension Mechanisms section and removed the mention of 
the 'vendor-binary=""' attribute.


> > The WG agree with what Ian says above. Karl, could you please respond 
> > to say whether you accept this or not?
> 
> No traces here
> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/waf/issues

The disposition of comments is at:

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/xbl2/disposition-of-comments


> And I have checked in the minutes of the last F2F (24, 25, 26) and I do not
> see where it has been discussed by the WG.

It was discussed here:

   http://www.w3.org/2006/10/26-waf-minutes.html#item02

But in my opinion such discussions are irrelevant as they were not done in 
public, with open participation, and therefore should not be considered 
part of the work surrounding the XBL2 specification.


"Please let us know if this does or does not satisfy your comment."

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'