> On 31 Aug 2015, at 20:12, Ms2ger wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Yves,
>
> On 08/31/2015 03:28 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
>> In fact, I would prefer to have the editors’ copy published as
>> TR/WebIDL/, and let -1 -2 … -n be pointers to the
> On 01 Sep 2015, at 14:27, Ms2ger wrote:
>
> Hi Yves,
>
> On 09/01/2015 11:30 AM, Yves Lafon wrote:
>> On 31 Aug 2015, at 20:12, Ms2ger wrote:
>>> On 08/31/2015 03:28 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
In fact, I would prefer to have the editors’ copy published as
Hi Yves,
On 09/01/2015 11:30 AM, Yves Lafon wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2015, at 20:12, Ms2ger wrote:
>> On 08/31/2015 03:28 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
>>> In fact, I would prefer to have the editors’ copy published as
>>> TR/WebIDL/, and let -1 -2 … -n be pointers to the stable version
>>>
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 7:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> 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
> On Aug 31, 2015, at 8:51 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Ryosuke Niwa 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.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> 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.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Yves,
On 08/31/2015 03:28 PM, Yves Lafon wrote:
> In fact, I would prefer to have the editors’ copy published as
> TR/WebIDL/, and let -1 -2 … -n be pointers to the stable version
> (aka, what is implemented, not what has to be implemented).
>
> On Aug 7, 2015, at 9:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Travis Leithead
> wrote:
>> This is, at a minimum, incremental goodness. It's better than leaving the
>> prior L1 published document around--which
From: Ryosuke Niwa [mailto:rn...@apple.com]
> For our internal documentation purposes, I'd refer having a perm link to a
> document that never changes.
>
> 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.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Ryosuke Niwa 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
> On 07 Aug 2015, at 14:45, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>
> On 8/4/15 2:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Arthur Barstow
>> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> This is heads-up re the intent to publish a Working Draft of "WebIDL
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
This is, at a minimum, incremental goodness. It's better than leaving the
prior L1 published document around--which already tripped up a few folks on
my team recently. I strongly +1 it.
If your team looks at
, 2015 5:55 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: Tab Atkins Jr.; public-webapps
Subject: Re: PSA: publish WD of WebIDL Level 1
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
The L2 version (by Cameron and Boris) has not been published as a TR
and if there no objections to proceeding
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Travis Leithead
travis.leith...@microsoft.com wrote:
This is, at a minimum, incremental goodness. It's better than leaving the
prior L1 published document around--which already tripped up a few folks on
my team recently. I strongly +1 it.
There are
On 8/4/15 2:21 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
This is heads-up re the intent to publish a Working Draft of WebIDL Level
1 (on or around August 4) using Yves' document as the basis and a new
shortname of WebIDL-1:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
The L2 version (by Cameron and Boris) has not been published as a TR
and if there no objections to proceeding as above, I will start working on
making this all happen.
I still don't understand why L1 is even published.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
This is heads-up re the intent to publish a Working Draft of WebIDL Level
1 (on or around August 4) using Yves' document as the basis and a new
shortname of WebIDL-1:
17 matches
Mail list logo