On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 22:22:59 +0530, Chris Wilson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think there are a few misconceptions about Sunava's feedback.
1) In NO WAY do we want the specification to be less detailed. MORE
detailed, if anything.
Yeah, we cleared that up at the technical plenary in my mind.
2) In fact, on that note, we're interested to see the test suite be
linked, normatively if necessary.
Yes. I think this is a valuable piece of feedback. Currently W3C process
doesn't require test suites until you're trying to get out of CR and I
think it would be better to have them earlier.
3) we are not intending to block last call, and we understand the
Process. Sunava had promised to send comments, and has done so. We
would still like to see these comments addressed in the specification,
and not simply dismissed; whether that is prior to or post LC is not, I
think, that important.
OK, thanks. I have no intention of simply having comments dismissed. I
have held the last call question open to allow for a sensible discussion.
What I am thinking now is that we should check whether there are
substantive comments that need to be addressed before LC (on my first
reading I don't think so), and continue pretty fast to last call. I would
like the group to start checking the test cases we have against the spec
and formally agreeing them to facilitate this linkage during last call. It
slows down the LC period, but it should make CR easier and reduce the
possibility of reverting from CR.
How do people feel about that as an approach?
Finally, on the question of what we agreed at the technical plenary, the
minutes do not reflect any resolution that we agreed we would make a spec
that is 100% compatible with IE - as Anne, Jonas and Maciej pointed out we
started out working from existing implementation including IE and trying
to make a spec that is as backwards compatible as possible, but that is
*a* goal not the driving requirement.
Naturally any specific requests for technical changes are welcome either
now or during Last Call, and will be considered on their merits. We had
hoped that any such comments would have come in already but one of the
reasons for going to last call when we have run out of comments at normal
working draft is to elicit any outstanding issues.
So I plan to give it a few days (I am only partly available over the next
few days, in India, Poland, Spain, Norway in the next week) and then I'll
propose a formal consensus call on a way forward - based on the above
thoughts and comments here over the next week.
cheers
Chaals
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Schepers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 1:54 AM
To: Maciej Stachowiak
Cc: Anne van Kesteren; Sunava Dutta; [email protected]; Gideon Cohn;
Zhenbin Xu; Chris Wilson; Marc Silbey; Ahmed Kamel
Subject: Re: IE Team's Feedback on the XHR Draft
Hi, Folks-
To be clear, I'm not critiquing the spec itself, or advocating any
specific action. Rather, I'm trying to manage expectations and ensure
that the various participants of this WG can work smoothly with one
another. I'm acting purely as a Process wonk here.
Sunava, as you see, there is considerable, and reasonable, incentive to
make the XHR spec as detailed as possible, even where it may not match
the IE implementation precisely. Maciej's request for more specific
details on potential conflicts (in implementations or content) is
appropriate, I think.
I don't know if you are familiar with the W3C Recommendation Track [1],
so briefly, you should know that LC (Last Call) is not the end of the
process. It simply indicates that the specification is believed to have
satisfied its technical requirements; it's not considered stable enough
for implementation, and in practice, this is when most comments are made.
Thus, I see little harm in advancing to LC, since you will still have an
opportunity to submit additional technical comments.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr
Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG, CDF, and WebAPI
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
