Re: Seeking status of Server-sent Events, Web Storage and Web Workers

On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> On 12/6/2010 1:08 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Dec 2010, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> > > Since Hixie is active on HTML, perhaps someone else is willing to pick
> > > one of these LCs and to review the issues, bugs, diffs, etc. and propose
> > > the next step . Any volunteers?
> > I am responding to feedback on these specs, just not on the schedule I
> > described earlier this year. (For instance, I just committed a change to
> > Web Storage.) My lack of urgency on getting things to CR stems primarily
> > from my disillusionment with the entire process; Web specs should just be
> > continuously maintained, having snapshots on the TR/ page seems to have
> > only one positive side-effect, and that's the effect on the patent policy.
> > Other than that it just provides a distraction that implementors and
> > authors can end up referencing instead of the more up-to-date and
> > continually maintained draft.
> > 
> > The drafts are actively maintained, and feedback is tracked and addressed.
> > It's just not done with the goal of reaching the TR/ page, but rather with
> > the goal of fostering interoperable implementations.
> Static section numbers, and patent policy are quite important to the 
> lawyer crowd.
> I agree, it's just one positive side-effect, but it's a big one.

If anyone wants to just take the draft and regularly publish a REC 
snapshot of it for patent policy purposes, that's fine by me, provided 
the snapshot is suitably marked as being a snapshot for that purpose and 
doesn't profess to being the latest version.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 6 December 2010 22:52:30 UTC