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

Re: Differences between WHATWG and W3C specs

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 07:16:06 -0400
Message-ID: <523ED176.7030708@intertwingly.net>
To: "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>, Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>
CC: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
On 09/22/2013 12:30 AM, Jens O. Meiert wrote:
>>>> these cases generally don't affect browser behavior.
>>>
>>> but they may effect other software such as conformance checkers.
>>
>> and authoring tools,
>> and indexers,
>> and converters. ;)
>
> …and people (authors)? In case of conflicts (as possibly with <cite>,
> to stick with the old example), which spec would be authoritative?

I imagine that you would get different answers on this list than if you 
were to ask the same question on the WHATWG list.

I encourage you to focus on specifics.  At the present time, the HTML WG 
has a head start working on the referenced bugs on the <cite> element. 
Over time, the WHATWG will resolve the bugs I cloned.  Any changes that 
might be made to the WHATWG specification as a result will be cloned 
into the W3C HTML repository:

https://github.com/w3c/html/commits/feature/whatwg

Each change will be evaluated and many (and generally most) will be 
"cherry picked" into the W3C HTML specification:

https://github.com/w3c/html/commits/master

The initial determination, made by the editors is posted for public 
discussion:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Sep/0176.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Sep/0172.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Aug/0130.html

If you check the WHATWG mailing lists, you will find that a number of 
W3C editors often participate there.

As I previously said, nobody has yet to find the magic bullet to make 
everybody act as one community, but these are illustrative of some of 
the efforts made by the W3C editors.

I'll close by repeating my suggestion that you focus on specifics.  The 
<cite> element was your initial example.  Watch both sets of bugs and 
look at the actual changes and come to your own conclusion.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 22 September 2013 11:16:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:37:34 UTC