W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2014

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.)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 13:23:15 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDB0qvMre2xXmNjy8jiorYzTBCMFWhYJxHKMeKCZROqgjA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Daniel Glazman
<daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
> On 05/02/2014 17:03, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> Attributing an ultimatum to my words is blatantly violating the
>> Principle of Charity, especially since I've *very explicitly*
>> clarified that I'm talking about the latter.
> I suggest you read again quietly your own words at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2014Feb/0036.html
> and try to understand how they were possibly perceived outside of
> Google.

How people perceived my words is a reflection of my own speaking skill
and their own prejudices.  Neither has any direct relevance to
reality, which is why I'm trying to correct the misperceptions.  The
important thing is what I intended with my words, and hopefully the
record is clear on that now.

>> We've been working on Shadow DOM in the open for 2 years, and have
>> gone to great efforts to get the other browser vendors involved and
>> seek their input and opinions as we develop the standard.  We feel the
>> standard is sufficiently advanced, the remaining issues sufficiently
>> small, and the benefit to authors sufficiently great to justify
>> shipping sooner rather than later.
> Can you just s/We've/Adobe has/ and s/Shadow DOM/CSS Regions/ and
> repeat that ?-)

Very relevant!  You'll note that my team has never complained about
Adobe trying to ship Regions in other browsers.  What issues we have
had with Regions have to do with our project's own concerns about our
codebase.  I explicitly stated at the f2f that our position is that
Adobe should keep working on Regions; we'll just consider it unstable
until we try to put it into our engine again.  It may very well be
that by that point, the only Regions-like thing we can reasonably do
is Regions itself, and that's fine with us.

In particular, the fact that IE and Safari are trying to ship Regions
is OK with us.  Obviously in a perfect world we'd prefer it to not
happen until we're ready to give it our own try, but we can't have
everything, and we recognize that our focus for the next year or so on
MOBILE-PERFORMANCE-OR-DIE-TRYING is a bit too limiting to try and
impose on other browsers.

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 21:24:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:18 UTC