On Fri, 16 May 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > > You can't make them informative by just saying so. The question is, do I > need material from HTML5 to implement a conforming XHR implementation?
To implement a conforming XHR implementation, you need an implementation of the Window object, the origin infrastructure, and the conventions of JS in browsers, much as you do to implement, e.g., DOM2 Core. Until recently there were no specs whatsoever that defined those, and browsers relied on reverse-engineering to implement those parts. More recently, HTML5 and the WebIDL spec have taken up the task of defining these areas, but they aren't complete. However, you don't need a complete implementation of HTML5 to implement XHR. Indeed, you don't even need an interoperable one. You just need to have the principles that are described (in long and painful detail) in those specs implemented in a consistent way. > If yes, then XHR can't be published earlier. If no, let's rephrase stuff > so that HTML5 isn't required. No, this isn't accurate. We can publish XHR whenever we like. The only thing that would stop us is blind obediance to process. > > The point is that Apple and Microsoft are both going to implement the > > thing as required by the Web in 2000, not as defined in HTML5. HTML5 > > is describing existing practice on these matters, not defining new > > material. > > Well, in that case pull that stuff out of HTML5 and insert it into the > XHR spec (or move it into something that can be published separately). We are talking about upwards of a hundred pages of actively edited material here. > If you decide to keep the references, I don't see how this document can > advance. Not sure how it works in W3C land, but in IETF land you simply > can't have a normative reference to something that is work in progress. In W3C land the official process is that references are supposed to be no more than one step removed. However, that's just a rule that humans have decided on, it isn't a fundamental restriction of nature. Rules should change when it is appropriate for them to do so. In practice it is unlikely to be an issue since the goal is to get interoperable implementations, not a slavish drive to REC, and thus waiting for years at CR stage is not a problem. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
