W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2009

Re: ACTION-96: Origin removal

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:19:44 +0100
To: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@us.ibm.com>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.un0fi6unidj3kv@hp-a0a83fcd39d2>

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:39:38 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> The issue we are trying to resolve is ISSUE-63[1]: "Origin header: in
> scope? required for this release?"
> It sounds like either way the intent is to delegate this to the IETF.   
> Both
> alternatives provide the same answers for the questions posed by the  
> issue.
> Given that there is precedent for "commenting out" areas of the spec  
> which
> do not enjoy consensus, and that I have recently been informed that
> sections can be removed from the HTMLWG draft and be retained in the  
> draft, would a decision to remove the description of the Origin header  
> from
> the HTMLWG draft without prejudice (i.e. the door is left open for this  
> to
> be reopened in the future) be something everybody could live with?

I don't see any reason to rush with removing it from the draft until it's in another spec. Opera is interested in implementing it so we'd rather have it specced somewhere than not specced.

Also, having it included in the WHATWG version but not in the W3C version could only lead to confusion, so I don't see that as desirable either.

Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Monday, 19 January 2009 15:20:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:41 UTC