- From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 13:41:17 -0400
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- CC: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
On 8/5/11 11:52 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 17:18 +0200, Marcos Caceres wrote: >>> Again, what are the reasons to link to the WHATWG HTML version? >> If there is something you need that is not in the W3C spec, then it seems like a valid reason (e.g., PeerConnection API or some helpful concept). > Agreed, but no one has come up with such need so far. I refer to the HTML WG's work as normative, but in the File API's Editor's Draft [0], I'd also like to link to the WHATWG document as an informative reference for the Stream API [1] and LocalMediaStream [2]. This is a pragmatic, and not a political, cross-referencing. Stream API reuses blob: URIs; LocalMediaStream defines globally unique identifiers in a way that I find useful for the opaqueString production. I'm tidying up normative and informative links, and in general, I think the time is ripe for a good discussion of affiliated specifications. Another area for coordination that I'd encourage is between W3C and Khronos, if it isn't happening already. For instance, File API makes use of ArrayBuffer [3] *normatively* which is defined at Khronos [3] and which is implemented in some user agents. Is there a formal liaison? This will benefit WebGL as well. Some of these affiliated technologies are not under strictly under the aegis of W3C, and I think that is perfectly fine. >>> What >>> does it mean for the work of the HTML Working Group? >> Egos aside, it should not mean anything… one has green headings, the other has blue ones. > In the ideal world, it should not, but the fact that we're having this > exact discussion indicates there is meaning behind. For example, Ian > pointed out earlier that "The W3C one has a growing list of intentional > errors.". > I'd like an ideal world as well, but I am optimistic that implementations will clarify discrepancies. The ability to refer across specifications keeps them current with implementations. -- A* [0] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/ [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video-conferencing-and-peer-to-peer-communication.html#stream-api [2] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#localmediastream [3] http://www.khronos.org/registry/typedarray/specs/latest/
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 17:41:58 UTC