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

Adam Roben wrote:
> 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 
> <>. 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 <>.

As near as I can tell(*), the only other example is in section 3.6.1 
which defines the manifest attribute of the html element.

- Sam Ruby

secno = '0'
ids= {}
open('html5.spec').each_line do |line|
   secno = $1 if line =~ /secno>([.\d]+)/
   line.scan(/<.*?>/) {|tag|
     tag =~ / id=['"]?(\w+)['"]?[ >]/
     ids[$1] = secno if $1 and secno[0..2] == '4.6'
puts ids.keys.sort
secno = '0'
open('html5.spec').each_line do |line|
   secno = $1 if line =~ /secno>([.\d]+)/
   line.match(/<.*?>/).to_a.each {|tag|
     tag =~ / href=['"]?#(\w+)['"]?[ >]/
     puts "#{secno}: #{$1}" if $1 and ids[$1] and secno[0..2] != '4.6'

Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 20:29:13 UTC