Re: [VTT] Consensus call: publish VTT under the 2014 Process?

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Loretta Guarino Reid wrote:
>
> I would really like a fixed-point version of the spec.

There's at least 166 fixed-point versions of the spec. For example, here's 
version 1.23 (25 April 2012):

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/webvtt/Overview.html?rev=1.23;content-type=text%2Fhtml

Here's version 1.166 (2 September 2014):

   http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/webvtt/Overview.html?rev=1.166;content-type=text%2Fhtml

There's also patent-licensed-covered version from February:

   http://dev.w3.org/html5/webvtt/e0a5a82bd5be3501e7649a949fcce4c7b83a427c.html


> It is fine for the spec to continue to evolve, but the range of 
> implementations of WebVTT in different browsers has me pulling my hair 
> out

The spec evolving actually helps that problem, it doesn't hurt it. If the 
spec didn't change, it would mean that the browsers would have no guidance 
on how to converge when the spec is known to be wrong.


> and it is hard to file bugs against behavior that doesn't match the spec 
> as the spec continues to move.

This would not be solved by having a snapshot of the spec. You could tell 
people today to implement version 1.166 of the spec. The problem is that 
when a bug is found in that version, the implementors aren't going to want 
to implement it. They'll want to implement the fixed version, 1.167.


> I think issuing a REC version of WebVTT is the easiest way to define a 
> fixed version.

That's definitely not the easiest way; the easiest way is the way we've 
already done it: just archive every version ever made.


I _think_ what you're _actually_ asking for is "stop making changes to the 
spec". That is something we should definitely do -- once something has 
shipped, the spec should match that and that part of hte spec should never 
change again. If the spec is changing in ways that make deployed 
interoperable implementations non-compliant, then that's a big issue.

But a REC wouldn't stop that, since even having a REC wouldn't stop the 
spec from continuing to evolve, just like having version 1.23 didn't stop 
the spec from continuing to evolve. Fundamentally, we always need 
somewhere to fix bugs that are found, and somewhere to put new features 
that people ask for and that browsers want to implement.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 4 September 2014 22:41:44 UTC