[html4all.org] implementations and bug reports based on HTL 5 draft

[Robert Burns]

Hi Jason,

I just want to add one other point about citing our draft on bug  
trackers. Most other W3C working drafts I have seen typically say[1]:
> Publication as a Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the  
> W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated,  
> replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is  
> inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
>
Ours does not say that, however since it is a W3C editors draft, it  
seems the same norm should apply. While Ii wouldn't try to enforce  
this norm for just anyone, it does seem perfectly reasonable to  
expect our WG members to abide by it.

Just for contrast, compare that norm to Lachlan's comment:[2]

Lachlan Hunt  2007-08-20 21:50:26 PDT
> This bug should be marked invalid now. HTML5 now defines the usemap  
> attribute
> as a Hashed ID Reference, not a URI, and can only reference maps  
> within the
> same document.

He goes on to link to specific document fragments in the HTML 5  
editors draft. A developer investigating this bug could very easily  
walk away not realizing the document was simply ann editor's proposal  
to the WG.

Take care,
Rob

[1]: For example the XHTMl2 draft:, <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/>
[2]: <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=189643>

On Aug 25, 2007, at 6:56 AM, Robert Burns wrote:

> Hi Jason,
>
> I'm not totally clear what your position is on these bug report  
> comments. I agree with everything you say in this message, but when  
> you get to the end you say:
>
>> I am sure that all major implementors are aware of this.
>
> I know Chris Wilson on the IE team is aware of this. I know that  
> Chaals on the Opera team is aware of this. However, WebKit and  
> Mozilla are much more decentralized communities. Patches and bug  
> fixes come from all sorts of places.s. Someone reading through the  
> comments on a bug may read these comments — deliberately written  
> authoritative voice — and think they are authoritative. Yes it is  
> true that upon further investigation they may notice the disclaimer  
> in the document header. However, a programmer fixing a bug is  
> usually not interested in such disclaimers. They diver in right to  
> the section cited in the comment to find out what to implement.
>
> So while I agree with what you said, this to me implies that  
> members of our WG should never write comments that can only be  
> intended to play with the ambiguity on this issue.  There's no  
> reason for Lachlan to add a comment to a bug saying that HTML5  
> defines blank. when HTML5 has not defined anything. the only  
> relevant recommendation to cite at this point is HTML 4.01 or XHTML  
> 1 or XHTML 1.1 on the issue. If this were a bug involving headers=  
> and Lachlan wrote ""The headers attribute has been dropped from  
> HTML5" in a bug comment, I think we'd agree that's not appropriate.  
> Wouldn't we? To me, his comment regarding <input usemap>  is no  
> different.
>
> Take care,
> Rob
>
> On Aug 24, 2007, at 10:11 PM, Jason White wrote:
>
>> The issue of bug reports being filed, and implementations possibly  
>> adopting
>> parts of the HTML 5 working draft at this early stage, has arisen  
>> on several
>> occasions during these discussions.
>>
>> W3C working drafts typically warn that the specification may be  
>> changed at any
>> time and that the working group will not be bound by early  
>> implementations in
>> deciding what changes to make. Early implementations are carried  
>> out entirely
>> at the risk of the implementor.
>>
>> Only late in the development process, and certainly by the Candidate
>> Recommendation stage, are specifications considered stable enough  
>> to be
>> implemented.
>>
>> HTML 5 isn't even a W3C working draft yet, so it would be far too  
>> early to
>> make implementation decisions based on it, unless one is prepared  
>> to undo or
>> change those decisions as the draft develops.
>>
>> I am sure that all major implementors are aware of this.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> list_html4all.org mailing list
>> https://www.html4all.org/wiki
>