Re: WHATWG/W3C collaboration proposal

Strongly support the effort to build a sustainable collaboration model between WHATWG and W3C. 

> On 25 Nov 2014, at 16:54, Domenic Denicola <> wrote:
> 2. The snapshot must have a title, or subtitle, that clearly reflects the purposes of the snapshot, and that it should not be used for implementations. We want to avoid "snarky", but something like "For IPR purposes" or "Not for implementations" would be important. (For those interested in commit-level snapshots for reference purposes, we can get the WHATWG producing and hosting such snapshots very quickly---within a week, I would anticipate. See for previous discussion of this.)

Only commenting on the above point: there is a (possibly philosophical) difference of opinion on which spec “implementers" can or should be pointing to. I’m wondering if it’s possible to come to a compromise solution that does not require us to resolve this difference of opinion. For example, the snapshot could say “This is a snapshot. Living version is [here]” and point to a “living diff” between the snapshot and the living version (so that anyone can determine just what the most up to date changes are), with some wording about “we recommend implementers reference the living version for the most up to date changes.” … rather than saying “this is not for implementers” or “this is only for IPR purposes.” ?  That way you leave it up to the implementer / developer to decide based on their own needs whether to use the snapshot or the living spec?


Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2014 17:58:24 UTC