W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms-tf@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Please construct a task force charter

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:42:20 -0700
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5DAC85A4-DD89-4162-AD31-ABCB8FCC68AC@apple.com>
Cc: public-forms-tf@w3.org


On Aug 22, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Chris Lilley wrote:

>
> Hello public-forms-tf,
>
> Now that both HTML and Forms WGs have nominated their task force  
> representatives, the next thing is to get a charter together.
>
> There are useful bits of wording in the Forms and the HTML WG  
> charters:
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/forms-charter
>
> the directors decision had an 'architectural vision' document and a  
> 'process comments' document, both have useful text and guidance:
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/vision
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/html-forms-process-public
>
>
> and Dan Connolly made a selection of useful wording from these in an  
> archived email message:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2007May/0015.html

Side note: One of Dan's quote was of an early internal version of the  
architectural vision document. He quoted it as:

"The charter calls for two equivalent serializations to be developed,  
corresponding to a single DOM (or infoset, though tag soup cannot be  
considered to have an infoset currently, while it can have a DOM).  
This ensures that decisions are not made which would not preclude an  
XML serialization. It allows the two serializations to be inter- 
converted automatically. Having new language features, there is an  
incentive for content authors to use it; and having client-side  
implementations means that there is the possibility to really use it."

However, the version of the vision document published actually says:

"Instead, the charter calls for two equivalent serializations to be  
developed *by the HTML WG* [emphasis mine], corresponding to a single  
DOM (or infoset, though tag soup cannot be considered to have an  
infoset currently, while it can have a DOM). This ensures that  
decisions are not made which would preclude an XML serialization. It  
allows the two serializations to be inter-converted automatically.  
Having new language features, there is an incentive for content  
authors to use it; and having client-side implementations means that  
there is the possibility to really use it."

The quote from the official version appears not to be about this task  
force at all, but about the HTML language spec deliverable of the HTML  
WG.

I mention this so we don't accidentally draw on the misquoted version  
of the statement.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2007 18:42:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:39 GMT