> On Aug 31, 2015, at 8:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@apple.com> wrote:
>> Let's say we implement some feature based on Web IDL published as of today.  
>> I'm going to refer that in my source code commit message.  Future readers of 
>> my code has no idea what I was implementing when they look at my commit 
>> message in five years if it refers to the living standard that changes over 
>> time.
> Apart from what Domenic said, IDs should remain stable over time and
> other than features getting expanded, they need to remain backwards
> compatible, just as your code base. (It also seems like useful
> information to know what you've implemented has been refactored or
> changed in some way in the corresponding standard, so you can take
> steps to update your code.)

I think you’re missing the point.  The point of these documentation is to know 
exactly what the patch author was looking at the time he wrote the patch.  If 
there was a typo in the spec, that’s an important information.

As for diff’ing what has changed, that’s exactly the use case.  In order to 
know what has changed, you need to know what the old spec was.  The living 
standard is a total nightmare as far as I’m concerned.

- R. Niwa

Reply via email to