W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > February 2013

RE: CfC: to publish "HTML5 Image Description Extension" specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 01:55:31 +0000
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
CC: "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, "Charles McCathie Nevile (chaals@yandex-team.ru)" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> (janina@rednote.net)" <janina@rednote.net>, "Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org" <mike@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AB5704B0EEC35B4691114DC04366B37F202A4D79@TK5EX14MBXC295.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
> I guess I was a step ahead when thinking about how to merge this into the specs.

We don't have to worry about folding this or any extensions spec into HTML 5.0 until "such a specification obtains consensus and meets the proposed CR exit criteria by 2014Q2 it could be folded back into the core HTML spec by that time." [1]

/paulc

[1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#issues

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329

From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 8:48 PM
To: Paul Cotton
Cc: public-html-admin@w3.org; Charles McCathie Nevile (chaals@yandex-team.ru); Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> (janina@rednote.net); Michael(tm) Smith (mike@w3.org; Judy Brewer; Michael Cooper
Subject: Re: CfC: to publish "HTML5 Image Description Extension" specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com<mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>> wrote:

>- As a Working Draft publication, the document does not need not be complete, to meet all technical requirements, or to have consensus on the contents.
All three of your points appear to be possible technical bugs against the HTML5 Image Description Extension specification.   Can you explain why they cannot be handled this way and why they should stand in the way of the FPWD?

I guess I was a step ahead when thinking about how to merge this into the specs. But we can indeed work this out while it's an FPWD.

I'm supportive.

Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2013 01:56:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 February 2013 01:56:30 GMT