Re: RfC: how to organize the DOM specs [Was: CfC: publish new WD of DOM Core]

On 9/9/11 6:27 AM, ext Olli Pettay wrote:
> On 09/07/2011 05:09 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Arthur 
>> Barstow<art.barstow@nokia.com>  wrote:
>>> Some members of the group consider the D3E spec as the highest 
>>> priority of
>>> our DOM-related specs and they have put considerable resources into 
>>> that
>>> spec. Doug and Jacob will continue to lead that spec effort, and as I
>>> understand it, a CR for D3E is imminent. I expect the group to help 
>>> progress
>>> that spec.
>>>
>>> At the same time, others members have put substantial resources into 
>>> DOM
>>> Core (and closely related functionality such as DOM Range). 
>>> Naturally, they
>>> want to preserve that investment and I support that work continuing.
>>
>> The real question is not who's invested what, it's what browsers will
>> implement.  If we're moving toward a situation where IE will implement
>> D3E and everyone else will implement DOM Core's idea of events,
> What is the real difference in D3E and DOM4's "idea of events"?
> Just some different syntax for initialization (new Event() ), which I
> see as an additional feature on top of D3E.
>
> Features in D3E are actively being implemented also in non-IE browsers.
>
>  and
>> both groups will claim to be implementing "the standard", that's an
>> absolutely terrible idea and we need to put a stop to it right now.
>> If the only real reason for it is because different editors or
>> employers have made investments in different bodies of spec text,
>> instead of because browser implementers actually disagree on what they
>> should implement, that's even worse.  I would object in the strongest
>> terms to progressing any standard to CR if it contains features that
>> are specified differently in a different standard, if it looks
>> plausible that different implementers will follow different versions.
>>
>> (I have not looked at the content of D3E or DOM Core, though, so I
>> can't say specifically how bad the situation would be if this
>> happened, nor which should be retired in favor of the other.)
>
> Atm the situation isn't bad, IMHO. DOM4 just adds something on top
> of D3E.

The D3E and DOM Core (nka DOM4) compatibility question has been asked 
before. I believe some alignments on both sides were made last May 
(before DOM Core was last published in /TR/).

If additional changes need to be made to make these specs compatible, 
the www-dom list should be used for related discussions, issues, etc.

-ArtB

Received on Friday, 9 September 2011 11:31:37 UTC