- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 22:24:01 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapi@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 15 May 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: >> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> ... >>> What's wrong with referencing HTML5? Why can't the spec be more ready than >>> its normative references? We're only really referencing the concept, the >>> details aren't particularly critical to XHR. >>> ... >> Because, by definition, normative references are part of the >> specification. > > But we don't have to limit ourselves to that definition. We could just as > easily say that XHR1's functionality is as defined in XHR1, and that it > uses terms and features that are currently underdefined. It wouldn't, in ...in which case I'd say that (a) the references aren't normative after all, and (b) the spec itself can't be normative as it is written. > practice, take anything away from the ability to get interoperable > implemenations of the feature described in XHR1. Really? What if Apple implements the thing as defined by HTML5-as-of-2008, and Microsoft as defined in HTML5-as-of-2009? If it matters, then it's a problem. If it doesn't matter, leave it out of the XHR spec, as apparently, it's irrelevant for the goal it's trying to achieve. BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2008 20:25:36 UTC