- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 21:38:10 -0700
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sep 20, 2012, at 9:15 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > > My interpretation of this is that it has to be shipping in a > nightly, preview, or beta release for a month in order to count. > > My memory of the motivation for this, in the CSS WG discussions, was > that we didn't want to require waiting until something shipped in a > final release, but if it hadn't shipped in a final release, we > wanted to have a decent indication that it wasn't going to need to > be reverted in order to be Web-compatible. Makes sense. Do you feel some sort of claim by the implementor that the implementation is sufficiently stable and mature would be an adequate replacement? > (I actually tend to think it might be best to just require waiting > for a final release; there have certainly been cases where it's > taken more than a month of something being in nightly builds -- and, > in particular, getting it into betas with a wider audience -- to > discover that it wasn't Web-compatible.) I think that would unreasonably disadvantage vendors with a slower release cycle. Regards, Maciej
Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 04:38:36 UTC