Re: Why splitting HTML5 into several specs has failed to work (Was: Request for clarification on HTML 5 publication status)

Sam Ruby wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> Why is "the" (as in one and only) specification the only document in 
>>> which this information can make it onto a W3C site?  I've seen 
>>> several specifications which are spread across volumes.  Can't 
>>> different volume in a series be in different states at any given time?
>>
>> There are a few reasons, but primarily the parts are too 
>> interconnected. (For example, the offline stuff has to integrate with 
>> the navigation stuff and the parsing stuff, which has to integrate 
>> with the scripting stuff, and soon enough you've brought in most of 
>> the current spec.)
>
> Care to elaborate?
>
> From a quick scan of the current draft, the only occurrences of the 
> word "offline" are in section 4.6.  I have no problem believing that 
> that section would depend on navigation, parsing, and scripting stuff; 
> what I am curious to see to what extent the reverse is true.

One example is in the Navigation section 
<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/#navigate>. Step 7 describes how to behave 
in the presence of opportunistic caching namespaces from application 
cache manifests, which are defined in the Offline Web Applications 
section <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/#offline>.

-Adam