W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > July 2015

Re: CfC: Mixed Content to PR; deadline July 6th.

From: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 21:06:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKXHy=f8GN+g2tY+RLEpC4N+L0aQBFdeK3E7wUfCW_434Um5vw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Cc: Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com>, Wendy Seltzer <wseltzer@w3.org>, Dan Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>, Kristijan Burnik <burnik@google.com>, "public-webappsec@w3.org" <public-webappsec@w3.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
If Firefox, IE, and Safari have one behavior, and Chrome/Opera have
another, then it seems like we can claim interoperability in either
direction. Since that's what the group agreed to do a few months ago, it
surprises me that Chrome's SW implementation made a different decision.
*shrug*
On Jul 17, 2015 20:46, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote:
> > Nevertheless, I believe we decided in the F2F earlier this week to
> > transition the document to PR as it stands, and to come back to the
> question
> > of exclusions (both for SW and for things like EME) in a "Level 2"
> document
> > (Brad, Wendy, does that match your recollection?).
>
> So you decided to advance something assuming it was interoperable.
> However, now you know that Chrome does not implement it and therefore
> other browsers cannot implement either (if they wish to remain
> competitive). I don't see how sticking to your original resolution in
> light of the facts helps or how you'll show interoperability.
>
>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>
Received on Friday, 17 July 2015 19:06:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:13 UTC