Re: {Spam?} Re: {Spam?} Re: [xhr]

Brendan Eich wrote:
> In this light, WHATWG should avoid making indefinite-timescale, 
> over-ambitious assertions. The W3C was rightly faulted when we founded 
> the WHATWG for doing so.

My apologies for a minor error: Anne informs me off-list that "W3C" 
(who?) added the warning. Not that it should matter for advocates of the 
warning where it shows up -- and it's in the WHATWG copy of the spec too 
(http://xhr.spec.whatwg.org/).

My point remains independent of "group blame": the warning is pretty 
much all a folly. All it has demonstrably done is to worry folks like 
Robert and then waste our time on this thread. I want those minutes of 
my life back.

/be

Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 15:24:04 UTC