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

CfC: remove Microdata from HTML 5.0, remove JS API, continue HTML Microdata as a separate spec

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:10:20 -0400
Message-ID: <51DC601C.8090102@intertwingly.net>
To: "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Preface:

The purpose of this email is to confirm the consensus that appeared to 
arise out of the 27 June telecon concerning topic of HTML Microdata. 
The relevant portion of the minutes can be found at:

   http://www.w3.org/2013/06/27-html-wg-minutes.html#item05

Our read is that Charles can now live with the "remove all references to 
Microdata from the HTML 5.0 CR draft" portion of the CfC below, allowing 
that part to proceed.

Our read is that Charles can now live with Microdata as a separate
document, which represents a change from the original CfC on this topic 
(below).  We still would need work to proceed on establishing exit 
criteria and assessing the document relative to that exit criteria 
(removing the JS portion could be seen as a part of that effort). 
Unless we get volunteers to do that, we should make it clear that the 
ultimate disposition of this document will be as a "tombstone" W3C note.

Finally, as we don't have consensus on what to do with 5.1, we suggest 
that this work be allowed to proceed via editors' discretion for now.

. . .

With that understanding, this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to:

a) to remove all references to Microdata from the HTML 5.0 CR draft,

b) to remove the Javascript API from the Microdata spec, and

c) to publish the separate "HTML Microdata" document as an extension 
spec (iff editorial resources can be found).

Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive 
responses are encouraged. If there are no objections by Wednesday, July 
17th, this resolution will carry.

- Sam Ruby

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: CfC: remove Microdata from HTML 5.0, incorporate Microdata into
5.1,  publish Microdata doc as a W3C note
Resent-Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 16:28:18 +0000
Resent-From: public-html-admin@w3.org
Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 12:27:49 -0400
From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html-admin@w3.org <public-html-admin@w3.org>

This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to remove all references to Microdata
from the HTML 5.0 CR draft, incorporate Microdata in its entirety into
the HTML 5.1 editors draft, and to terminate development of the separate
"HTML Microdata" document, and to publish the results as a W3C Note.

Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive
responses are encouraged. If there are no objections by Thursday,
May 9th, this resolution will carry.

Note that the current working target for HTML 5.1 is 2016, and that even
if this resolution passes it is expected that this topic will be
revisited periodically.

- Sam Ruby

On 04/24/2013 07:17 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> This was a topic of discussion at the F2F[1]
>
> Summary: during a CR advancement call with the Director, we noticed a
> merge failure.  While that was corrected, Blink chose to remove
> Microdata API.  Oprah is EOL'ing Presto.  We have other signs of lack of
> industry momentum for Microdata.
>
> Four ways forward were discussed:
>
> 1) Remove references to Microdata from the HTML specification, and
> publish Microdata as a note.
>
> 2) Remove Microdata API from the Microdata and HTML specifications, and
> advance that document to CR.
>
> 3) Fold Microdata into HTML 5.1, remove from 5.0, and revisit
> periodically during the development of 5.1.
>
> 4) Remove Microdata API and fold into HTML 5.0.
>
> My sense of the sentiment in the room at the time of the discussion was
> that there was considerable support for option 3, and there were various
> levels of objections to options 1, 2, and 4.  While some clearly
> preferred other options, everybody could live with option 3.
>
> The purpose of this note is twofold:
>
> 1) Solicit other options that those in the room might have missed.
>
> 2) Solicit additional objections to any of these options, in particular
> the third alternative.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2013/04/23-html-wg-minutes.html#item04
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2013 19:10:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 9 July 2013 19:10:51 UTC