- From: Lars Erik Bolstad <lbolstad@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 08:55:19 +0100
- To: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, public-geolocation@w3.org
On 08.03.2012 16:09, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Anne van Kesteren<annevk@opera.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:30:47 +0100, Andrei Popescu<andreip@google.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Sure, but we're running out of charter. I don't think we can renew the >>> charter just because we have to tweak the IDL and references....I'm >>> still not sure I understand what you're proposing we do. >> >> >> You can, but apart from that: >> >> * Define how this feature works with the event loop >> * Remove the init*Event() methods that have been obsoleted and must not be >> introduced now >> >> Now ideally you also define the appropriate event constructors, because >> implementors will want to implement them, and developers will want to use >> them. >> >> I'm not sure what reference game you're playing, but there is nothing in the >> W3C Process document that prevents a W3C Recommendation referencing drafts. > > We're not playing any games. What you're saying conflicts with the > information here: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/2011Feb/0022.html > >> And to define the actual feature a normative reference to HTML is required, >> which in turn depends on DOM. So I'm not really sure why you keep playing >> the ball back to me instead of explaining how any of that makes sense. > > Sorry, there's some confusion here: the assumption behind this thread > was that there is something that prevents a W3C Recommendation from > referencing drafts, whereas you say there is nothing like that :) > > Perhaps the best avenue here is what James suggests: obtain permission > to advance despite the dependencies. I'm not sure how easy that is to > do, though. > > Thanks, > Andrei Well, I can check. Thanks, Lars Erik
Received on Friday, 9 March 2012 07:56:01 UTC