W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: ISSUE-94 Change Proposal

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:44:07 -0700
Message-ID: <r2i63df84f1003311544t4e54d522ib4eb0e2ba52eba11@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> I support the idea of this proposal. To split browsing contexts,
>> Window, History, and similar concepts out into a separate
>> specification.
>>
>> Unfortunately this proposal is IMHO not detailed enough to produce
>> such a split. Much less to review if the split fulfills its intended
>> goals of producing a simpler HTML5 specification.
>>
>> For example, how should HTMLDocument.open() be specified given that
>> it's a HTML specific feature, but heavily intertwined with browsing
>> contexts? How do iframes interact with History.back()?
>>
>> I'd love to see someone take the original HTML5 document and produce
>> an actual split, this way we can debate the details of that split. I'd
>> imagine that if someone did this I would likely vote for such a change
>> proposal.
>>
>> If I were Ian and the current change proposal were approved, I would
>> have no idea what to do.
>>
>
> That's a good point, and I'm aware that an actual two documents would
> have been best, but this was one I just didn't have time for.

I suspect this is true for all of us, which is the reason it hasn't
happened yet.

> If the co-chairs feel this one isn't detailed enough, I'm afraid it's
> going to just have to die. And that's unfortunate, for the browser
> companies, and the spec.

Indeed, the realities of resource constraints can suck.

My personal opinion on this is to put out a request for someone to
create a split, and then if/when someone creates a split we can debate
that. If Ian isn't willing to take such a split then we have the
normal decision process to follow.

If no one does produce a split, well, then we're stuck with what we've
got for obvious reasons.

/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 22:44:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:00 UTC