Call four comments 4 is out (Was: [whatwg] Web Forms 2.0 submission to W3C)
ian at hixie.ch
Wed Apr 13 02:31:24 PDT 2005
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Dean Jackson wrote:
> > Ok. Could you provide us with a list of features you believe need use
> > cases listed? That would be really helpful in creating such a
> > document.
> All of them.
That's never going to happen, just like the XHTML working group has never
published a document with use cases for all their features. Ditto the SVG
group, the CSS group, and so forth. Most of the features have quite
obvious use cases -- for example the use case for the first feature in the
Web Apps draft -- <html> -- is having a predictable root element for the
document or document fragment.
I can maybe find the time to produce a document summarising the use cases
for the less obvious features (probably by simply copying the text from
e-mails in the archives of this mailing list, where the features mostly
originated), but I don't want to waste time doing so for dozens of
features where the use cases are obvious and nobody disagrees.
> For example, I see many new HTML elements in (the strangely named) Web
> Applications 1.0 for which I'd like to see the requirements. If only to
> understand why you chose a different approach than the W3C HTML Working
> Group (eg. maybe you are trying to solve a different use case and
> therefore have a different requirement).
The two different requirements are "backwards compatibility" and "well
defined error handling / processing model". I expect every difference in
the details of common features can be traced down to those two things.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg