Re: w3process-ISSUE-124 (WHATWG-blacklist): Normative Reference policy should explicitly black list WHATWG specs [Normative Reference Policy]

On 9/8/2014 2:40 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 9/8/14 2:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> I will support Jeff's assertion that your comments regarding the 
>> current state of WHATWG's URL specification were inaccurate.
> Sorry but I don't understand what I said that is not accurate so I 
> would appreciate it, if you would please clarify.

I did that in my first response on this thread.

You said "However, based on my conversations with Consortium staff last 
week, the Director will NOT permit a Proposed Recommendation to include 
a normative reference to a WHATWG spec."

And I responded: "This statement is incorrect [1]."  In the internal 
call between Team and WG Chairs there was no categorical statement 
blacklisting the WHATWG.  We only discussed whether a particular spec at 
this point in time seems to fulfill the normative reference criteria.


>> Can you provide a link which describes to what normative reference 
>> the Progress Events specification proved to be problematic and why?
> I think the changes made for the Draft PR in 
> <> identifies the 
> WHATWG references that had to be changed. As for the "why" here, if I 
> understand what your after, I believe the gist was "make these changes 
> or no PR/REC" ;-).
> -AB

Received on Monday, 8 September 2014 19:01:01 UTC