- From: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 14:45:58 -0400
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > On 10/03/2014 01:25 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> >> BUT, snapshots are terrible for interoperability. Implementations >> referencing old documents leads to implementation bugs, leads to lack of >> compatibility, basically, snapshots for Web techs are actively harmful to >> the goal of any standards organisation, namely, interoperalibily. So it's >> critical that any standards organisation be really careful to not spread >> confusion by having multiple versions of its specifications, or, if it >> does, be exceedingly unambiguous in its labeling to make sure that nobody >> in their right mind, other than patent lawyers and government officials, >> would ever consider referencing such a specification. > > > FYI, Anne and I have been having a discussion on this topic, and seem to be > converging on a different conclusion: > > http://intertwingly.net/blog/2014/09/16/The-URL-Mess#c1412200341 > > As a part of my reply to that comment, I state: > > "In my opinion, we need to start by looking at the part that is often left > out of the “Living Standard” discussions. It is not one-dimensional choice > between up-to-date and stale. The problem space is actually > multi-dimensional. Proven vs experimental is another dimension." > > If you scroll back to an earlier part of that page, you will see the > following statement by me: > > "While I am optimistic that at some point in the future the W3C will feel > comfortable referencing stable and consensus driven specifications produced > by the WHATWG, it is likely that some changes will be required to one or > both organizations for this to occur" > > I'm actively working to see what changes would be required, and intend to > report back when that effort is complete. > > - Sam Ruby > While it is potentially just adding fuel to a fire, I will mention that as a developer, I like the idea that WHATWG had with implementation status flags on sections and I feel like that helps what you're saying Sam. -- Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
Received on Friday, 3 October 2014 18:46:25 UTC