- From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:45:57 +0000
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- CC: "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Sam Ruby wrote: > On 12/18/2013 11:22 AM, Adrian Bateman wrote: > > MSE has a normative dependency on the HTML5 media element. Since it is > > an extension spec, it seems strange to consider it proceeding ahead of > > HTML5. > > Welcome to the new W3C :-) > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2011JulSep/0092.html Sure, but I think there should be a distinction between independent features that have a dependency on HTML5 for their context and features that specifically extend HTML5 features. Given all this discussion about what should be said in HTML5, it seems like this isn't stable enough to warrant the exception either. > > Note: It is entirely possible, and with the current state of affairs > > likely, that MSE will return for a brief Last Call to resolve the > > outstanding Stream dependency once the Stream API settles down. > > We discussed this at TPAC: > > http://www.w3.org/2013/11/14-html-wg-minutes.html#item01 > > Is the assumption that that this is to happen after CR? > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Dec/0026.html Yes (hence "return to" assuming the current Process). At the very least it seems likely that we'll have to go back and change the name of the object and update the reference to a newer spec. Some people may believe this invalidates their review.
Received on Wednesday, 18 December 2013 18:46:49 UTC