Re: Procedural (non-technical) point about freezing the cat and hat combinators before they've even been defined (was Re: Shadow DOM: Hat and Cat -- if that's your real name.)

On 04/02/2014 01:17, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

 > Sorry, this is my fault.  These things *were* defined in the spec
 > before, but we sliced them out for a separate spec, which I was
 > supposed to write and haven't gotten finished yet.
 >
 > That said, my last (voluminous) update from November
 > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Nov/0313.html> is
 > still completely correct, except for the naming change/functionality
 > split of :host() into :host() and :ancestor(), which I talked about in
 > the f2f and which are pretty clear in the minutes.
 >
 > While this update is not quite spec-worthy, it's fairly close, and
 > I'll be closing the gap as soon as I can.

Sorry to be trollish here, but before or after the implementation is
shipped, ahem ?-)

Since we speak of procedure, I find this is very surprising.
Last week in Seattle, I don't recall you mentioning that urge to
resolve.

 > Dimitri's email wasn't a question of whether or not the WG is happy
 > (the minutes are clear), but a request to get the bikeshedding done
 > *right now* and decide on some better names so we can make the thing
 > before we ship.  Otherwise we'll be shipping with ^ and ^^ instead.

Well, that's not how standardization works and Google has brought those
hat and cat combinators to a ftf LAST WEEK. I know you sent some 
messages to www-style in the past but lack of answers is NOT a "go for
it" blank check. Standardization is not a "right now" thing, especially
when we discussed the case just _days_ ago and some of us came back from
travel only this week-end.

You also said:

 > speak now or forever hold your peace

Quite surprising, to say the least...

Dimitri Glazkov said:

 > Personally, I am convinced that we've invested more than enough into 
ensuring that we've got the right thing for the Web platform and built 
enough confidence by proofing the concepts with both building a 
performant implementation in Blink and eating the dog food with Polymer.

Fine. But apparently, standardization did matter to Google on this
topic. Now, I have read multiple times an ultimatum à la "make a
decision right now or we'll ship, never change and that will become
the standard". This was not Google's habits and I remember times when
Google was complaining because of some other companies doing precisely
that.

</Daniel>

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 12:36:12 UTC