On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 17:47:45 +0200, Doug Schepers <[email protected]> wrote:
On 9/4/11 9:41 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I do not think that is appropriate given that unlike all our other
specifications it does not use Web IDL
DOM3 Events does provide Web IDL definitions for the interfaces [1]; it
simply doesn't make them normative, because Web IDL is not yet stable.
Should the Web IDL spec reach a stable state in time, we can make the
Web IDL definitions normative.
All our specifications use Web IDL normatively. I do not see why DOM Level
3 Events has to be special here.
and we still have not settled how
to deal with exceptions on the web platform.
DOM3 Events doesn't change anything about this. Should a later spec
(such as DOM 4 / DOM Core) change how exceptions are handled, and if
implementers agree with that change, we can simply issue an erratum for
that in DOM3 Events, and publish an updated draft. This is a minor and
common issue... that later specifications supersede previous ones.
The File API specification has a warning in the specification about this
changing. I think at a minimum that should be stated.
These were just two issues that came to mind though, I still have
outstanding Last Call comments, as do other people.
Anne, I try not to impute motives behind feedback, but you have been
putting unusual energy behind undermining and blocking the progress of
DOM3 Events, including:
* deliberately defining conflicting behavior in a later edition
specification being developed in parallel with DOM3 Events, without
raising those issues with the DOM3 Events editors
Not true. I already explained I started with a clean state. I then checked
the differences and raised issues.
* refusing to join telcons to which you were invited to discuss issues
you've raised
Not true. I did not refuse, but I indicated I could not join that day (if
I remember correctly it would have been late at night for me).
* asking other groups (like the Web Performance WG) not to cite DOM3
Events on the grounds that it is "obsolete"
Not true. That was about DOM Level 3 Core and I did not say obsolete:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-perf/2011Jul/0079.html
* raising issues very late in the process that call for sweeping
non-technical changes to the spec (such as splitting the spec out into 2
different specifications)
That issue was raised almost well over a year ago now. And it was not just
raised by me. It still seems like the best solution to me. That the "DOM
Event Architecture" and "Basic Event Interfaces" chapters of DOM Level 3
Events are removed and that you make it an events specification similar to
Progress Events.
* claiming that W3C Process has been violated in dealing with your
feedback, when it had not
Water under the bridge. I already acknowledged this was a misunderstanding.
* Finally, this email, where you state a false claim (that we don't
provide Web IDL definitions) and introduce a blocking claim (exception
handling) that will not be resolved anytime soon and which is not
critical for the success of the spec and its implementations.
Both are technical issues with the specification.
Perhaps these were unintentional missteps on your part, rather than
deliberate attempts to slow down the progress of the specification, but
it had the same effect of causing more work for the editors and stalling
the process. I don't think this is appropriate behavior for
participating in a group in good faith, and seems more political than
technical.
I think you are making more out of this than it is.
You have also provided good feedback to the spec, which we have
incorporated and which we appreciate. This spec, with feedback from
crucial implementers and reviewers, provides incremental and substantial
improvements to the Open Web Platform, such as a much-needed
standardized keyboard model, and I suggest that any further improvements
needed can be made in a later DOM spec.
Can we simply move forward, please?
As long as we disagree on how I am not sure how.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events/#webidl-definitions
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
