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

Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-100 srcdoc

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:34:32 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTintkrn9ExJ8Pf5M82cWTa2eu7QOcVJGH7ML89Q_@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
I have no objections to this decision overall.  However, just for the record:

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:22 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> c) Increases divergence with the WHATWG spec
>   No specific evidence was provided that this would increase
>   divergence.  There are cases where the WHATWG spec diverges from the
>   W3C specification, and there are cases where bug reports and issues
>   filed against the W3C specification have resulted in improvements to
>   the WHATWG specification.

I posted a link to IRC logs:


An excerpt from there is:

# [23:10] <AryehGregor> Yay, more polls.
# [23:10] * AryehGregor puts off voting for a few days
# [23:11] <Hixie> this one doesn't seem so important
# [23:11] <Hixie> it's just "should the w3c spec be complete or not"

Given that the reference was to this issue, I don't see how this could
be interpreted as anything other than "if the HTMLWG removes this
feature, it will remain in the WHATWG spec, thus making the W3C spec
less complete relative to the WHATWG spec".  The evidence is arguably
not very clear, but I'd say it's quite specific.  (If this comes up
for a future issue, though, I'll be sure to get a clearer statement
from Hixie.)
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 01:41:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:05 UTC