- From: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 13:47:11 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html-admin\@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, "www-dom\@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Hi all, Paul wrote: >> As stated in the Last Call WD, the HTML WG plans to take this >> specification directly to Proposed Recommendation status when the Last >> Call review is completed. Boris replied: > This draft contains things that not only don't have two interoperable > implementations but have no implementations at all, as far as I can > tell (e.g. ParentNode.query). Oof, yeah, that does sound like a problem. And it doesn't look like it was marked at risk. Actually, it doesn't look like anything is marked at risk. > What's the current state of the test suite and UAs passing it? The > draft talks about this being a requirement for entering PR (in the usual > way), but I simply don't see how that's possible at the moment given the > obvious lack of implementations mentioned above. I wasn't sure pointing > this out needed explicit last call comments, but maybe it does. > > And, of course, there are the remaining open issues that are called out > in the draft (Document stuff and createElement issues) and for which it > also didn't seem like additional last call comments were needed since > the issues are longstanding and well-known. Agreed; participants shouldn't need to reiterate existing, well-known issues that are already called out in the document.
Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2015 20:46:55 UTC