- From: Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 12:50:20 +0100
- To: "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>, timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Mounir Lamouri" <mounir@lamouri.fr>, "Frederick Hirsch" <w3c@fjhirsch.com>, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>, "W3C Device APIs WG" <public-device-apis@w3.org>
On Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:14:30 +0100, timeless <timeless@gmail.com> wrote: > Wouldn't Chrome + Yandex only be one implementation, since it's really > just two instances of Blink? > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> > wrote: >> On 21/01/2016 13:34, Mounir Lamouri wrote: >>> >>> Do we need implementations or shipping implementations? I do not know >>> if the Yandex browser ships the API but the API is not enabled by >>> default in Chromium's builds. >> >> When we want to go to Proposed Rec, we'll need 2 shipping >> implementations; Actually, that's an over-simplification of the Process requirement. What you *need* is to show the spec "…is sufficiently clear, complete, and relevant to market needs, to ensure that independent interoperable implementations of each feature of the specification will be realized." [1] The *ideal* way to do so is demonstrate that a large proportion of the market is using independently realised implementations by people who weren't writing the spec at the same time, and which successfully interoperate for all features. This ideal requires a few things: - a market where most products are developed by people following the spec who did not participate in developing it. - a broadly competitive market with multiple implementors - a way of showing that each feature works Because these are not always realistic expectations, the Process doesn't bother *requiring* them. Nor does it automatically accept that when two groups of people have made an implementation, and some test suite gives 100% pass rates for two implementations, the spec is sufficiently implementable. Without multiple implementations, it is not certain that a spec meets market needs in a way that ensures independent interoperable implementation. Without people implementing it independently of the Working group, it is hard to judge whether it is clear enough. In both cases, arguments such as "blink is the common base for most of the market", or "multiple independent development teams reviewed the code and spec and believe they match" *may* convince the director. Or the group may prefer to wait until there is more "hard evidence". [1] https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#implementation-experience, referred as a requirement from https://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/#rec-pr cheers -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:50:55 UTC