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

ISSUE-96 implementation experience

From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 08:31:00 -0500
Message-ID: <4BEEA214.6000400@burningbird.net>
To: public-html@w3.org
My apologies for sending this as email. I'm no longer a member of the 
group, and so cannot record my observations in the survey.

WebKit released an implementation of the progress element for its Mac 
build yesterday. I've been experimenting with it since, and have 
recorded my observations [1], and additional concerns about the 
implementation[2]. I'm informally submitting both to the email list, as 
additional criteria for co-chair consideration.

There are many new and modified elements in the HTML5 specification that 
do not have any implementation, and several that only have partial 
implementation by one User Agent. There are no implementations of any of 
the new or modified elements by any User Agent other than browsers (such 
as in authoring tools, or WYSIWYG plug-ins). Lack of implementation, or 
plans for implementation, especially when an element has been part of 
the WD for years, seems to meet the criteria for "features at risk". 
Features at risk are those most likely to be challenged during Last 
Call, which could impede progress of the document through the Last Call 
process.

Just an observation.

Regards,

Shelley Powers

[1] 
http://realtech.burningbird.net/web/html5/cross-browser-implementation-progress-element
[2] 
http://realtech.burningbird.net/web/html5/progress-element-truly-progressive
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr#cfi
Received on Saturday, 15 May 2010 13:32:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:02 UTC