Re: Reminder regarding normative references

[Mike West]

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Steve Faulkner 
wrote:

> hi mike, i think you will find your example is in the W3C HTML 5.1:
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/webappapis.html#creation-url
>
> not saying there aren't other examples that would be concrete.
>

I am pleasantly surprised!

I assume this means that I ought to be reference HTML 5.1 and not 5 in
whatever snapshots WebAppSec produces?

-mike

Re: Reminder regarding normative references

[Steve Faulkner]

On 7 October 2015 at 08:15, Mike West  wrote:

> As a concrete example, I'm going to send a transition request for Secure
> Contexts shortly. It uses the "creation URL" concept which was recently
> added to WHATWG's HTML (
> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#creation-url).
> That concept is not present in the W3C's HTML (nor is it clear to me how to
> get it added :) ). How do you suggest that we proceed?
>

hi mike, i think you will find your example is in the W3C HTML 5.1:

http://www.w3.org/TR/html51/webappapis.html#creation-url

not saying there aren't other examples that would be concrete.

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C

Re: Reminder regarding normative references

[Mike West]

On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Wendy Seltzer  wrote:

> A reminder that has come up in some recent transition calls: When moving
> a spec to Candidate Recommendation, we look to see that the normative
> references are to documents of equivalent stability[1] -- ideally, also
> CR, if they're W3C documents. So if you're moving a document forward,
> it's a good idea to look periodically at the references and ping the
> other working groups where those are being developed to make sure that
> dependencies are moving at the pace we need. (This also helps to satisfy
> the "wide review" requirements.)
>

A corollary to this is that "stability" should be balanced against
"accuracy". That is, http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/draft-ietf-iiir-html-01.txt
is pretty stable, but we ought not reference it today, as it doesn't
represent what browsers are doing.

What do you/the director/his delegates suggest that we do if we'd like to
reference concepts that aren't yet present in W3C specifications?

As a concrete example, I'm going to send a transition request for Secure
Contexts shortly. It uses the "creation URL" concept which was recently
added to WHATWG's HTML (
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/webappapis.html#creation-url). That
concept is not present in the W3C's HTML (nor is it clear to me how to get
it added :) ). How do you suggest that we proceed?

+public-webapps, as I believe specs like Service Worker have similar
problems (and, in this case, the exact same problem).

-mike