Given the objections to this CfC, a publication request for CR will not
be submitted. The group's next step will be to"endeavor to resolve" the
objections as described in the Process Document [Consensus].
Ms2ger enumerates 3 points in his objection [Objection-1]. My
expectation is that those supporting the CfC will respond to these
points and both the D3E supporters and DOM4 supporters will work toward
achieving a mutually agreeable position on them.
In Marcos Caceres' objection [Objection-2], he asserts some of the
overlaps and redundancies between D3E and DOM4 are confusing and
requests the D3E spec clarify its relationship to DOM4. I encourage
Marcos to work with the Editors on text and/or changes that clarify the
relationships.
This CfC created two additional points of contention:
1. Request by Alex Kuang to Review D3E test suites [RfR-D3E]
2. Request by Alex Kuang to add EventException support to WebApps'
testharness.js [EventException]
Until we have reached consensus on the spec issues, I propose these two
requests be postponed and I will reply to those e-mail threads separately.
I added a 16:00-17:00 agenda topic for D3E and DOM4 for WebApp's f2f
meeting on Monday October 31 [Oct31-Agenda]
-AB
[Consensus]
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Consensus
[Objection-1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2011OctDec/0108.html
[Objection-2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2011OctDec/0111.html
[RfR-D3E]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps-testsuite/2011Oct/0001.html
[EventException]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps-testsuite/2011Oct/0002.html
[Oct31-Agenda]
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2011#Agenda_Monday.2C_October_31
On 10/14/11 3:27 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
The people working on the D3E spec (namely Jacob, Doug and Olli)
propose below that the spec be published as a Candidate Recommendation
and this is a CfC to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DOM-Level-3-Events/html/DOM3-Events.html
The comment tracking document for the last LCWD is:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DOM-Level-3-Events/dc.html
This CfC satisfies: a) the group's requirement to "record the group's
decision to request advancement" to CR; and b) "General Requirements
for Advancement on the Recommendation Track" as defined in the Process
Document:
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs
The exit criteria has not yet been added to the ED and I request the
Editors to please propose the specific criteria in response to this
e-mail before the comment deadline. It is my expectation that
Microsoft and Mozilla will complete the test suite [TS] they started
and they will implement this CR. As such, I assume the exit criteria
will include a requirement that at least two independent
implementations pass all of the test cases.
As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged
and silence will be considered as agreeing with the proposal. The
deadline for comments is October 21 and all comments should be sent to
www-dom at w3.org.
-AB
[TS] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webapps/file/tip/DOMEvents/tests/submissions
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Request for CfC to publish DOM Level 3 Events as a CR
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:11:52 +0000
From: ext Jacob Rossi <[email protected]>
To: Arthur Barstow ([email protected])
<[email protected]>, Charles McCathieNevile ([email protected])
<[email protected]>
CC: Doug Schepers ([email protected]) <[email protected]>,
[email protected] <[email protected]>
Art and Charles,
We'd like to request a Call for Consensus to publish DOM3 Events as a
Candidate Recommendation. We believe the spec is ready for such
publication on the following grounds:
1. Responses to Last Call issues have been documented in a published
Disposition of Comments [1].
2. At least two members are targeting implementations of this spec
(Microsoft, Mozilla)
3. All changes since the Last Call draft have been editorial with the
exception of:
Revision 1.204 - this change was more of a clarification of
intended behavior and it matches implementations.
4. In a recent Working Group teleconference, we've agreed on how to
move forward with submitting and approving test cases for a suite
(more on this subject to follow shortly).
We recognize that there will always be new ideas for the event
model--some great new ideas, such as event constructors, have recently
been proposed. But we can't keep DOM3 Events in perpetual evolution.
As such, I've prepared a rough proposal for a new specification to
continue innovation in the event model (preliminarily titled "DOM4
Events" with event constructors as my first suggestion for scope). I
believe such a spec can be written to extend and improve upon DOM3
Events in areas that are outside the scope of DOM4 (e.g., event
constructors for interfaces outside the "DOM Event Architecture" and
"Basic Event Interfaces" chapters of D3E). Doing so will give
implementers a stable spec to target (D3E) while still fostering new
ideas and continued improvement in the model (DOM4, "DOM4 Events").
I'm sure folks will have some great technical feedback as well as
suggestions for goals/scope of my proposal, and I don't want that to
get mixed in with this request for a CfC. So I'll follow up with a
link to that proposal shortly in a separate thread so we can begin
that conversation.
Regards,
Jacob Rossi
[1]http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DOM-Level-3-Events/dc.html
