W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

RE: [HTMLWG] CR Exit Criteria redux

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:20:14 +0000
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4afacfca0e30498b9e985227129e3d01@BL2PR03MB604.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 9:37 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Note that both of these examples are likely to be scenarios we actually face for at
> least some of our specs, not just hypothetical edge cases.
> Boris, Adrian, others, do any of you have suggestions for a form of "endorsement by
> implementor" that would give clear answers to these problem cases?

We're talking about an implementer submitting an implementation report for passing specific
test cases. For multiple people contributing to a common library, ultimately someone takes
that library and packages it into an implementation that can pass the test case. Anyone that
does this can endorse their implementation. Just like the criteria that deal with how
independent certain implementations are there needs to be some judgement used. For two
products working together, assuming both are necessary to pass the test case, then I think
either should be able to submit a passing implementation (and again judgements of independent
may come into play with the second passing test - does it use the same browser engine and if
so is that a problem?)

I'm not yet convinced that it is a good idea to conflate determining that the spec is of
sufficient quality to support independent interoperable implementation with determining
that the feature is compatible with the existing web. Those seem like distinct problems,
the latter one being approached differently by different organisations and with different
tolerances to incompatibility.


Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2012 14:23:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:27 UTC