On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Robin Berjon <ro...@w3.org> wrote: > I was hoping that we could simply reference WHATWG URL as a (small) token of > good faith and normalisation, adding a small cobblestone to pave the way to > cooperation.
If that was the goal, changing the "Goals" section of the spec to cast doubts about whether the direction the W3C envisions for the spec is consistent with the goal that are the actual reason for the spec's existence was a rather bad way to go about it. As for whether it's a small-group concern, I wish there was less confrontational rhetoric, so I don't want to show up to make a "group of angry agitators" larger, but I think there should be a spec that defines how URLs work in a way that's well-defined realistically implementable in browser engines (and in other software that wishes to work with content that's written mainly to be consumed by browser engines). Considering how long the IETF has had to deliver such a spec but hasn't delivered and how practically infeasible it seems to get the kind of work that Anne is doing done within the framework of an IETF WG, I think Anne's spec should be given a chance without casting doubts from the start about it getting changed over motivations other that Web compatibility in a later revision. -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@hsivonen.fi https://hsivonen.fi/ _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
