Re: RfC: moving Web Storage to WG Note; deadline June 29

On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 17:43:15 +0200, Adrian Bateman  
<adrianba@microsoft.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 22, 2011 3:24 PM, James Robinson wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Aryeh Gregor  
>> <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>  
>> wrote:
>> > > Note that there are currently major browsers that do not follow the  
>> > > spec as currently written and have explicitly said that they have no
>> > > plans to do so.
>> > If browsers can agree on what to implement, update the spec to reflect
>> > that.  If they can't and we don't think they ever will, update the
>> > spec to say behavior is undefined.  Either way, it's no less worthy of
>> > REC-track specification than other preexisting features that are
>> > flawed but in practice not removable from the platform.
...
> I agree - the current API isn't ideal but it is what it is and there is  
> reasonable interoperability at this point. Microsoft would prefer not to
> see the spec move to WG Note status and instead see the spec modified to
> reflect the current implementations: removing the SCA, removing the  
> mutex,
> and adding a warning about the race conditions would get us most of the
> way. There are certainly uses of this feature where the race is unlikely
> to cause a problem.

Yep, Opera agrees. So, do you have someone available to edit the spec thus
and help it through the Rec track?

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com

Received on Monday, 27 June 2011 15:59:54 UTC