Hi, Anne-
On 9/4/11 11:04 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
A reply to a private email.
Adrian objected[1] to the current name, I agreed and suggested[2] an
alternative, David Flanagan suggests[3] "WebDOM", I explain[4] why
"DOM4" is better, David seems[5] fine with it. After not hearing
anything from Adrian I complain[6], and he replies[7] not giving any
concrete suggestions other than that "DOM4" might be too unbounded given
that the scope is unclear. I tell[8] him I clarified the scope even
more. A little before Arthur started[9] the organization thread, where
Adrian is again vague[10] and Arthur ends up saying[11] the scope is not
clear (which I do not believe[12] is true as I clarified it mid-August).
Meanwhile I still have not gotten feedback on the proposed name nor how
the "Goals" section does not address the intended scope, but I have
gotten so much wishy washy process email I feel somewhat annoyed.
I agree that DOM 4 is a much better name.
I think it is ironic, however, that you are annoyed with "process
issues" when you yourself have been attempting to invoke process and
using stop-energy to DOM3 Events [1]. If you really believe your own
rhetoric about decreasing process and being predisposed toward progress,
then I suggest you practice what you preach.
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2011JulSep/0156.html
Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Developer Outreach
Project Coordinator, SVG, WebApps, Touch Events, and Audio WGs
