W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Request for CfC to publish DOM Level 3 Events as a CR

From: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:58:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CANMdWTt24VKfn8fv1Xwj6hGP2AHeC35QC80ES1=OjrM7ki_rCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Jacob Rossi wrote:
> >
> > We'd like to request a Call for Consensus to publish DOM3 Events as a
> > Candidate Recommendation.
> While I do not object to publishing any specs, I still think in this
> particular instance that the approach taken by the DOM Core spec in
> integrating DOM Core and DOM Events, and specifying DOM Events in a more
> concise way, is the better approach. I would recommend removing the DOM
> Events model from this specification, leaving only the definitions of the
> actual events ('click', etc).

Wholeheartedly agree.

> > But we can't keep DOM3 Events in perpetual evolution.
> I disagree with this premise. All Web specs can, and indeed should, remain
> in perpetual evolution. As I've said many times, the current "jerky" model
> encouraged by the TR/ process is harming the Web. In this instance, for
> instance, improvements such as event constructors are artificially being
> delayed from being added to established event interfaces for no reason
> other than the process.

Strongly agree with this as well. In the specific case of DOM3 Events, there
have been many proposals to add new events or modify existing ones that have
been put on hold indefinitely because of a desire to get the spec to CR.
This forces browser vendors to either not implement the feature or implement
it without standardizing it. Both of those results seem much worse than any
benefits we get from the current process.

Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 02:58:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:36:59 UTC