- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 09:39:23 -0800
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "ext Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
This email is written as the position of several Chrome engineers working in this problem area at Google, though not Google's official position. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: > * What is the latest implementation status of the XBL2 CR [XBL2-CR] and > Hixie's September 2010 version [XBL-ED] (previously referred to as > "XBL2-cutdown")? Chrome does not implement either form of XBL2. > * Which members of WebApps want to continue with the XML-based version of > XBL2 as codified in the XBL2 CR? If you are groupin this , what firm > commitments can you make to push the spec along the REC track? Would you > object to the Forms WG taking over this spec? We object to continuing with XBL2. The original XBL2 was flawed, and the cutdown version of XBL2 is incomplete and still too complex. I'm not sure if we would object, per se, to the Forms WG taking over XBL2, but we would consider it wasted effort that would not result in us implementing it in Chrome/Webkit. > * Which members of WebApps want to continue with the non-XML version as > Hixie created last September? If you are in this group, what firm > commitments can you make to push this version along the REC track > (especially implementation)? We do not wish to work on either version of XBL2. > * Should the WG pursue Dimitri Glazkov's Component Model proposal > [Component]? If yes, who is willing to commit to work on that spec? We believe that the Component Model proposal should be pursued. Dimitri Glazkov volunteers to edit the spec. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 17:40:15 UTC