Re: WebIDL: how to address the various audiences and constraints?

On Sep 30, 2009, at 2:43 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> On Sep 29, 2009, at 21:20 , Cameron McCormack wrote:
>> As for having a simplified version first including only what’s needed
>> for those specs that need Web IDL done quickly, maybe.  HTML5 is by  
>> far
>> the biggest user of the esoteric ECMAScript features.  I guess I  
>> would
>> like to know, for the authors of dependent specs, how quickly they  
>> need
>> Web IDL done.
>
>
> WebApps has a document in LC that depends on it (Widgets 1.0: The  
> widget interface), and it's a really trivial document to test — we  
> don't expect it to be long before we can transition, but it is  
> blocking on its dependency on WebIDL. I'd say it's at most one month  
> before its progress is hampered by process alone.
>
> It's too early to tell but DAP has some low-hanging fruits that I  
> would expect it to be possible to make quick progress on (famous  
> last words — I know). Here we're looking at a 3-6 months window.

As I understand W3C Process, a spec can enter CR with a dependency  
that is still a Working Draft. What is not allowed is for a document  
to *exit* CR and transition to PR or REC while depending on a Working  
Draft - all dependencies at that point must be CR maturity or higher.  
In the timelines above are you referring to completing Last Call and  
entering CR, or are you talking about a timeline to complete CR and  
enter PR? I believe only the latter would be blocked by a delay in Web  
IDL.

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2009 10:13:47 UTC