- From: Elad Alon via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 14:37:46 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> Specs inform implementation, not the other way around. It is useful for specifications to **reflect abiding reality**. This serves Web developers. Developers often read these specs too, and who often treat these specs as authoritative. As for "**abiding**": * It is likely that some Element subtypes will be rejected for the foreseeable future. (And time will tell if this is a pattern common to multiple UAs.) * It is also likely that occasionally, a new subtype will be introduced. Whichever UA-implementation team adds that subtype, might not have as a high priority to ensure cropping works for that new subtype. Note that this is likely for any UA, and not just Chrome. > In any case, I agree it is out of scope here, so please open a separate issue. I think the two issues are highly correlated, and revolve around whether the spec should specify that, **in reality**, the user agent may fail the process, and that spec authors accept this reality. -- GitHub Notification of comment by eladalon1983 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-region/issues/48#issuecomment-1136015111 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 24 May 2022 14:37:48 UTC