wrote: > that covers more than just query() In that case, shouldn’t we re-open https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1105827, and file new dependent bugs for what is not yet implemented / covered? https://github.com/dbaron wrote: > hesitating about the bug URLs, because I'm a little hesitant to drive traffic to bugs Makes sense. Worth adding to this project readme/how-to officially? As in something like: “The mozBugUrl field should only be filled in for "worth prototyping" or "important" standards, to avoid misdirecting higher-level discussion traffic to the bugs, which should be focused on implementation-specific discussions.”

https://github.com/martinthomson wrote:

> that covers more than just query()

In that case, shouldn’t we re-open https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1105827, and file new dependent bugs for what is not yet implemented / covered?

https://github.com/dbaron wrote:

> hesitating about the bug URLs, because I'm a little hesitant to drive traffic to bugs

Makes sense. Worth adding to this project readme/how-to officially? As in something like:

“The mozBugUrl field should only be filled in for "worth prototyping" or "important" standards, to avoid misdirecting higher-level discussion traffic to the bugs, which should be focused on implementation-specific discussions.”