- From: Marcos Cáceres <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 00:11:42 -0700
- To: w3c/charter-html <charter-html@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/charter-html/issues/145/308648703@github.com>
> The current approach of the Working Group is not to simply copy-and-paste, but to do necessary work on specifications according to W3C processes, as chartered by W3C members. But this risks throwing everything off. If the fixes to bugs are accepted, they should be fixed upstream so they actually end up getting implemented. > In particular, W3C produces stable specifications that have undergone both implementation and quality review, and are considered to provide a reasonable reference point for a vast audience. I don't think the implementation part is true. No browser vendor implements from the copied W3C specs. This should be demonstrable if web platform tests for any fixes you do on the w3c side don't end up getting fixed in browsers (or there is a mismatch between what is in the WHATWG spec and the WP tests). I think a case needs to be made here by the WG that proves that implementers are actually reading and implementing the copy/pasted specs (including any fixes claimed to be made). This can only be shown with implementations passing associated Web Platform tests. If the WG can show that, then I, or any else, don't really have a case to argue. However, if the WG can't prove that this effort is having affect on interoperability, then it would be time to stop with the copy/paste efforts. I'd like nothing more than to be proved wrong. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/145#issuecomment-308648703
Received on Thursday, 15 June 2017 07:12:28 UTC