- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:25:20 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: Karl Dubost <kdubost@mozilla.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@mozilla.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On 22/09/2014 16:15 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote: >> On 20/09/2014 11:20 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> Yeah the W3C crowd keeps saying that, yet hasn't invested any >>> meaningful effort into creating modules. >> >> I'm not sure who the "W3C crowd" are (it sounds like an arbitrary moniker >> designed to encourage "us vs them" thinking) but the only meaningful >> investment into creating modules that I know of is starting pretty much now. > > You are not familiar with the constant TPAC-refrain of how we need to > modularize HTML? Jeff for one has been saying this a lot and then > everyone claps, goes home, and does nothing about it. I was under the impression that I hadn't heard that in a very long time, but it is equally possible that I have somehow acquired a way of just filtering it out :) > As far as actual modularization of HTML goes, I'd claim > XMLHttpRequest, Fetch, URL, Encoding, DOM, etc. are all examples of > that. Agreed, in fact I've been using these as proofs of existence. My thinking is basically that we can use more of the same. > Although DOM and XMLHttpRequest have a two-way dependency with > HTML, effectively making them just another page that happens to be > maintained by someone else. I don't think that two-way dependencies are an issue. It's actually a fairly expected feature of systems of any complexity. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 22 September 2014 14:25:32 UTC