Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Stages are unaligned with TC39 and WHATWG conceptually #11

Open
bvandersloot-mozilla opened this issue Nov 25, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@bvandersloot-mozilla
Copy link

There is a current discussion in WHATWG about clarifying what makes Stage 3, and it seems it aligns with TC39. This arose because there was some ambiguity about what constitutes Stage 3. I think we fell victim to that ambiguity.

Specifically, our definition of Stage 3 doesn't match the other two, and is probably what they are trying to more specifically exclude. It is in other contexts, to quote Dom, Stage 3 means "finished, pending editorial nit review---but since multiple implementations haven't happened yet, there's a reasonable chance that we'll discover something is broken, and need to fix the normative content". That reflects more of the consensus we have in Stage 4 in our process.

Would it make sense to align our definitions so that "Stage N" means the same thing everywhere, especially if we hope other CG/WG will pick up our stages?

@hlflanagan
Copy link
Collaborator

Discussed on https://github.com/fedidcg/meetings/blob/main/2024/2024-11-26-notes.md. @hlflanagan to propose a change to the WG process to keep us aligned with TC39 and WHATWG.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants