W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet)

From: Mike Schinkel <w3c-lists@mikeschinkel.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 05:55:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4610D2FE.4000505@mikeschinkel.com>
To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>   
>> Thanks for the clarification. I do hear you and think you have valid 
>> points, but doesn't it seem to you that having two parallel groups 
>> discussing the same issues where not everyone is involved in all 
>> discussions somewhat troubling?
>>     
> Like I said, the ideal situation would be for the two groups to work 
> together, as far as I am concerned. I don't really know what it would mean 
> for everyone to be involved in all discussions -- 700 to 900 people 
> discussing every topic seems unmanageable. (There are 250 HTMLWG members 
> and 720 WHATWG members).
>   
Oh, I agree with that. What would be better would be to subdivide into 
several larger areas of interest to all people to divide and conquer.  
Of course that begs another question, but anyway...

OTOH, what we have right now is the worst of all worlds: two groups with 
each group discussing all of the same issues.
> In practice in the WHATWG I edit the documents taking into account 
> everyone's feedback; there's not really any need for discussion to happen 
> in a single place. In fact, in addition to the WHATWG mailing list, I also 
> take into account feedback I see from people who aren't in the group, e.g. 
> at conferences, on blogs, in forums, based on the research I've done at 
> Google and on other people's research, based on direct feedback from 
> browser vendors, based on comments in bug reports, etc.
>   
I don't know how it is humanly possible for you to do all that, AND do a 
good job of it... (I'm not at all criticizing your work, it's amazing, I 
just questioning the ability for any one human to do a good job at all 
that.)
>> Wouldn't not be possible to merge the two activities, at least until the 
>> W3C proves that it won't make progress (hopefully not, but that is your 
>> concern, right?)
>>     
>
> I've encouraged everyone on the WHATWG list to join the HTMLWG list, 
> which I believe is the only way to "merge" the two groups, given the 
> HTMLWG's patent policy requirements. I'm not sure what can be done beyond 
> that at this point.
>   
Well one thing could be done would be to close the WHATWG list 
temporarily.  If you did that, everyone who cared would join the HTMLWG...

JMTCW.


-- 
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesignedurls.org
http://atlanta-web.org - http://t.oolicio.us
Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 09:55:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:52 GMT