W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > November 2012

[Bug 19923] html-polyglot should be a Note

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:45:45 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-19923-2486-0BvBQDo1Wv@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19923

Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rubys@intertwingly.net

--- Comment #1 from Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> ---
Henri's rationale includes a number of unsupported assertions, examples:

1) the document should only document conclusions drawn from normative
statements made elsewhere

2) polyglot guidelines only serves to document the overlap of the two 
serialisations as a convenience for authors who wish to pursue this 
style of document production

A recommendation to use utf-8 is a concrete counter example to both of these
claims.

Henri further claims that "The HTML5 specification already normatively defines
the conformance criteria for all of the features employed in both
serialisations.".  I believe that the conformance criteria specified in that
document is incomplete and that the Polyglot document seeks to correct that,
and can therefore be considered an extension specification:

http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#extension-specs

... and as such, an extension specifications "MAY prohibit certain otherwise
conforming content".

I can understand somebody chosing not to participate or endorse such an effort,
but I would very much rather that such individuals not stand in the way of this
work.  As long as we have editors interested in pursuing this initiative, I
believe that the HTML WG should provide a welcome home for normative
recommendations that go beyond what is specified in HTML 5.0.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 15:45:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 9 November 2012 15:45:52 GMT