- From: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>
- Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 15:39:37 +0100
- To: "'Web APIs WG'" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Hi, Folks- Jim Ley wrote: | <content /> | | [...] a specification is for what an implementor | needs to implement, not what an author needs to code. | <content /> | | I don't want an advised I want at the very least a SHOULD, | and preferably a MUST. | | You're working from this from a perspective "I don't want | Mozilla to be marked non-conformant", I'm working from a | perspective of "I don't want all my content to be marked | non-conformant". If we agree that going forward | optional parameters are correct, then I think it's better to | deal with the non-conformance in one legacy UA at REC stage, | than it is to invalidate lots of web-content in the future. I could not agree with Jim more in this regard. Implementations are ephemeral, while this spec will hopefully bring everyone in line shortly. Best to do it right, not play politics. Nobody can fault Mozilla for not being conformant to a Spec that postdates the implementation, and it will probably be fixed by the time this Spec percolates to the general author. Regards- Doug doug.schepers@vectoreal.com www.vectoreal.com ...for scalable solutions.
Received on Sunday, 5 March 2006 14:39:46 UTC