W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [selectors-api] Transitioning to CR

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:30:08 -0400
Message-ID: <4A3BAF00.1090204@mit.edu>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Robin Berjon wrote:
> Yeah, I have this Ecmascript implementation that only supports variable 
> declarations (with a few bugs). But I swear it supports the Selectors API!

Yes, that's why there was an "if" in what I said.  If only English had 
clearer grammatical markers for the subjunctive!

> Seriously though, as I explained during the last meeting it's up to the 
> WG to reach consensus on the exit criteria, and then up to the WG to 
> reach consensus on whether they've been reached or not.

Makes sense to me.  I thought that was the point of Lachlan's mail: to 
see consensus on the former.  Did I misunderstand?

Just to be clear, here are the things that stand between where we are 
and having two 100% interoperable implementations last I looked at the 

1)  Gecko's handling of null passed to a string value doesn't match
     WebIDL (treated as empty string instead of "null");
2)  Webkit's handling no value when a string is expected doesn't match
     WebIDL (not sure of the details here).

If we exclude issues regarding which precise selectors should match 
where (as in, bugs in the CSS implementation), then instead of fixing 
both of those, we could fix one of those, and fix Opera's handling of 
null and undefined passed to a string value (doesn't match WebIDL) and 
then we'd also have "interoperable" implementations.

Whether the two issues above should block passing out of CR is up to the 
working group, of course.

Received on Friday, 19 June 2009 15:30:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:12:54 UTC