W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2014

Re: Draft [URL] reference update to informative text

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 05:22:29 -0400
Message-ID: <5437A555.5060807@intertwingly.net>
To: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On 10/09/2014 05:06 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote:
> From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net]
>
>> I appreciate that you have other things to do; meanwhile what would
>> you suggest for people who do have time to contribute and would
>> very much like to see the specification more accurately reflect
>> what works?
>
> I can't speak for Anne, but personally, my strategy would be:
>
> 1. Figure out what modifications it would take to the parsing
> algorithm to make your hot pink rows into pale green or gold. Unless
> they are *exceedingly* complicated, I imagine Anne would accept a
> pull request for those.

On 10/09/2014 05:07 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:

>>> I appreciate that you have other things to do; meanwhile what
>> would you suggest for people who do have time to contribute and
>> would very much like to see the specification more accurately
>> reflect what works?
>
> Please send Pull Requests. Lots of eyes watching the spec and lots of
> us are happy to review changes.

On 10/10/2014 03:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
> wrote:
>> I appreciate that you have other things to do; meanwhile what would
>> you suggest for people who do have time to contribute and would
>> very much like to see the specification more accurately reflect
>> what works?
>
> It sounds like you are asserting that a change to the specification
> is what's needed here, which is different from the conclusion that I
> reached. I have researched these test failures before and for each
> them at the time I roughly knew why each implementation was doing
> what it was doing. And then based on that I decided whether the
> specification needed adjustment or not. Obviously that is a series
> of judgment calls and for particularly hairy cases I've asked for
> input. However, I've done this trick of defining something that's
> already implemented in non-interoperable fashion by multiple user
> agents and then getting them to converge several times. And in my
> experience at some point the attempt to convergence needs to start to
> get the feedback that can finish the specification.

I'll note that these inputs are not consistent.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 10 October 2014 09:23:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:06 UTC