Re: Browser implementations, prior to rec, used for justification

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Julian Reschke <> wrote:
> Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Julian Reschke <>
>> wrote:
>>> James Graham wrote:
>>>> On 05/01/10 14:31, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>>>> And autobuffer is from which released specification, where we have to
>>>>> worry about legacy use?
>>>> Usage is a matter of quantifiable fact, not a matter of W3C Rec track
>>>> status. If it is agreed that the legacy implied by released Firefox
>>>> makes
>>>> the attribute name "autobuffer" unsuitable to resuse at this time it is
>>>> strictly irrelevant whether the legacy came from following a "released
>>>> specification", proprietary invention, an unintended bug, or an
>>>> amazingly
>>>> improbable set of cosmic-ray induced bit flips on the build machine.
>>> Agreed by whom?
>>> Firefox can be updated easily.
>> I'm surprised by your level of confidence here. What are you basing
>> the above statement on?
>> What we can and can not put in a dot release is a very complicated
>> matter. For example we are responsible towards distributors that have
>> very conservative views on what is appropriate to put in a dot
>> release. Our by far over reaching goal with dot releases is to make
>> people more secure. If there's a risk that a behavioral change breaks
>> even a small number of websites we risk that people choose not to
>> install a dot release in order to keep their used websites working. We
>> already have much bigger problems than we'd like to get people to
>> upgrade to the latest dot release.
>> So unless you have talked to firefox people out of band about this
>> specific issue, I would change the terminology from "firefox can" to
>> "we should check if firefox can".
> Well, it *is* being updated regularly.
> Whether Mozilla chooses to push a HTML5 compliance issue fix into a dot
> release is of course up to Mozilla to decide, but *technically* it's not a
> problem, as far as I can tell.

Sure. I don't just don't see why it's different for firefox than any
other browser. Even IE is updated fairly regularly with security
fixes. And technically I don't see that any other couldn't do the same

/ Jonas

Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2010 20:28:06 UTC