Re: RfC: LCWD of Web Notifications; deadline October 24

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wednesday, 27 November 2013 at 20:36, Jon Lee wrote:
>
> > As explained in the Status of this Document section of the spec [1], the
> referenced WHATWG document is related to the W3C Editor’s Draft, but is not
> the Editor’s Draft [2] of the W3C Web Notifications working group.
> Editorial suggestions for clarifying that text are welcome.
> >
> > Please let us know promptly whether this response satisfies your
> comments and suggestions.
>
> So, it just reads:
>
> "The bulk of the text of this specification is also available in the
> WHATWG Notifications API Standard, under a license that permits reuse of
> the specification text."
>
> Knowing what the differences are is important. If there are none, that's
> ok. But please make that clear. If there are some, it's important to
> explain what they are so if someone goes to implement this, they are aware
> they are different. Another thing the spec could do is just tell people
> which one is the authoritative source (hence an implementer should follow
> that one when implementing).
>

I don't think the W3C spec can or should claim primacy over the WHATWG
specification - they are just different (albeit related) entities. In fact,
I'd argue that it's not the role of the W3C spec to highlight differences
between itself and any other specs out there, nor should it be instructing
implementors to ignore other specifications.

In this specific case, the WHATWG spec is a living document, so any attempt
to enumerate differences would quickly become stale.


>
> I'd be satisfied if the above is addressed before proceeding. Just a
> sentence or two would make a big difference!
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> --
> Marcos Caceres
>
>
>
>
>