Re: Including the Presentation API in HTML5.2

I concur with Steve' recommendation.

======================================
Ian Devlin
iandevlin.com <http://www.iandevlin.com>
@iandevlin <http://www.twitter.com/iandevlin>
skype: idevlin
======================================

On 11 October 2017 at 14:13, Alex Danilo <adanilo@chromium.org> wrote:

> +1 to Steve's comment.
>
> Alex
>
> On 11 October 2017 at 23:10, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> leave it there and include a warning in the HTML5.2 spec that indicates
>>> the current state of interoperability.
>>
>>
>> is my recommendation
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> SteveF
>> Current Standards Work @W3C
>> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>>
>> On 11 October 2017 at 12:44, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello HTML,
>>>
>>> We marked the Presentation API "at risk" in HTML5.2 because it is only
>>> implemented in Chrome at the moment [1].
>>>
>>> We've since heard from Anssi Kostiainen (chair of the Second Screen WG
>>> )that the Presentation API recently went into CR, and that they expect to
>>> move to PR when there is a second implementation [2]. Anssi mentions that
>>> if the reference to the Presentation API is dropped from the W3C HTML spec
>>> it will likely mean they reference the WHAT WG version of HTML instead.
>>>
>>> There is an intent to commit from Firefox [3], and two issues tracking
>>> progress [4] and [5], although there has been no recent activity on either.
>>>
>>> The question is whether we should pull the Presentation API out of
>>> HTML5.2, or leave it there and include a warning in the HTML5.2 spec that
>>> indicates the current state of interoperability. We've done this
>>> previously, with Promise rejection handling with rejectionhandled and
>>> unhandledrejection events in HTML5 1 for example [6].
>>>
>>> Comments from the WG would be welcome, either here or on the Github
>>> issue [2]. This is the last thing we need to decide upon before we take
>>> HTML5.2 to PR, so prompt responses are appreciated.
>>>
>>> Léonie.
>>> [1] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/969
>>> [2] https://github.com/w3c/html/pull/1040
>>> [3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/mozilla.dev.webapi/Rjv
>>> u-cBJ1TY/r0GeiIbDAIcJ
>>> [4] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1184036
>>> [5] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1184073
>>> [6] http://w3c.github.io/test-results/html51/implementation-report.html
>>>
>>> --
>>> @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk carpe diem
>>>
>>>
>>
>