- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 01:09:43 -0400
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: Olivier Thereaux <Olivier.Thereaux@bbc.co.uk>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 7/29/2013 7:05 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Noah Mendelsohn<nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote: >> >Again, I have no informed opinions on the specific merits, just suggesting a >> >useful role the TAG might play to clarify for the many members of the >> >community who are less expert on this than you are. Thank you. > I'm not sure we call out data races anywhere, it's something we just don't do. Well, my recollection may be faulty, but I think that one of the reasons the TAG took the trouble to formalize things like the architecture document was the belief that it's easier to ask skeptics to stick to rules that have been written down, and especially those that have garnered formal consensus through something like the Recommendation track. Whether it's worth taking a guideline on data races all the way to Rec I'm not sure, but it seems that it would be worth setting it down formally, perhaps in a TAG Finding/blog post/Recommendation or whatever will get the right level of discussion, consensus building, and eventually attention. Certainly, of the many things that have come up recently relating to APIs, this one seems deeply architectural and very much within the TAG's remit. Noah
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 05:10:07 UTC