- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 20:25:29 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Chris Wilson wrote: > > The only way out of this would be for EVERY browser to very carefully > only ship "proprietary-marked" (a la CSS' vendor extensions) versions of > APIs/elements until the standard moves OUT of CR, and then add support > for the standard naming and deprecate their proprietary-marked versions > over time. Or at least, to do so with features that don't have obvious ways to be updated without needing version syntax. Why is that a problem? In the case of the spec changing while there is already an implementation, it's not like the spec is going to have BOTH versions defined, and it's not like other browsers are going to want to impement BOTH versions. There'll just be one browser with the two versions, and we can quite easily do that without version syntax (for example, Mozilla implemented globalStorage, then their feedback resulted in major changes, so we just renamed the object so that they could have both without compat problems). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 25 April 2009 20:26:07 UTC