Re: XMLHttpRequest Level 1- specification history

On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Jungkee Song wrote:
> >
> > I really would rather the W3C stopped causing all this confusion with 
> > all these forks of WHATWG specs. It's harming the Web.
> This snapshot is not to develop the features in its own way but to 
> provide the work for the implementors to test and achieve the 
> compatibility with.

That's the goal of the WHATWG version.

The W3C process actually makes it harder to achieve this, since it 
involves multiple copies of the specification (e.g. editor's drafts, 
outdated copies on the TR/ page, etc).

Either way, though, the change you said you would make here is to 
non-normative content, so it is a fork that in no way impacts the purpose 
for which you say you are editing the spec.

> I think the related testing efforts [1] (the current status [2]) from 
> many industry players (of course Anne contributed enormous part of the 
> test too) are improving the Web in a way.
> [1]
> [2]

Those tests, if they are going to be useful, will track the WHATWG 
version. That is, if the WHATWG version changes to fix a bug and the W3C 
version doesn't (because it's a REC, say, and thus can't change), then the 
WHATWG one is the one that the tests will match. And thus, the W3C one is 
not going to do anything to "provide the work for the implementors to test 
and achieve the compatibility with".

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

Received on Monday, 31 March 2014 00:59:43 UTC