- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:44:04 -0800
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
On Jan 18, 2013, at 4:25 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>> * that there are implementations that support >>> generating polyglot documents >> >> >> Potential candidates: Planet Venus and Wunderbar. >> >> http://www.intertwingly.net/code/venus/ >> https://github.com/rubys/wunderbar > > Even if two implementations written by the same person are independent > in the sense that they don't share lines of code, they are not > independent in the sense that they'd demonstrate that the spec is > clear enough that two different people reading it end up writing > interoperable software. For that reason, I think citing these two > implementations as the two independent interoperable implementations > would fail at least the spirit if not the letter of the Process > requirement. It would also fail the letter of the definition of independent we used in the CR exit criteria for HTML5 and HTML Canvas 2D Context: Independent - Each implementation must be developed by a different party and cannot share, reuse, or derive from code used by another qualifying implementation. Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of this specification are exempt from this requirement. This definition of independent is modeled on the one used by other WGs such as CSS, so I think it's generally understood that way. Cheers, Maciej
Received on Friday, 18 January 2013 19:44:35 UTC