Re: W3C's version of XMLHttpRequest should be abandoned

Hi Hallvord,

I don't have a specific opinion on where what should be done, speaking 
personally I certainly don't have an issue with XHR being at the WHATWG, 
but just some notes below in case it helps.

On 06/08/2015 14:07 , Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen wrote:
> And that is mostly my fault. I intended to keep the W3C fork up to date
> (at least up to a point), but at some point I attempted to simply apply
> Git patches from Anne's edits to the WHATWG version, and it turned out
> Git had problems applying them automatically for whatever reason -
> apparently the versions were already so distinct that it wasn't
> possible.

Yes, once differences grow too much, even if you make use of 
cherry-picking, at some point there isn't much that git (or diff/patch) 
can do to merge two documents that are too far apart.

> Since then I haven't found time for doing the manual
> cut-and-paste work required, and I therefore think it's probably better
> to follow Anne's advice and drop the W3C version entirely in favour of
> the WHATWG version. I still like the idea of having a "stable" spec
> documenting the interoperable behaviour of XHR by a given point in time
> - but I haven't been able to prioritise it and neither, apparently, have
> the other two editors.

Depending on how involved the differences between L1 and the LS are, one 
option is to do this with code. If L1 is a subset and the subsetting 
doesn't require editing things mid-sentence (e.g. just dropping sections 
and a few odds and ends) then you can simply keep pulling the LS and 
apply code that filters out what you don't want.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Thursday, 6 August 2015 13:13:12 UTC