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

Re: help navigating your HTML spec text objection?

From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 07:33:14 -0400
Message-ID: <463F0E7A.902@earthlink.net>
To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
CC: public-html@w3.org

John Boyer wrote:
> [...] My motivation is that the Forms WG has the most experience
> developing and deploying forms,
> and would be particularly valuable in helping understand XForms
> architecture and apply it to help
> achieve disambiguated spec wordings regarding how HTML5 forms maps to
> and can scale up to
> XForms.

   Listen to yourself. You're not talking about a specific qualified
person to be editor. You're talking about some theoretical individual
who is ASSUMED to be qualified by mere membership in the Forms Working
Group. I think you need to identify a specific individual that solves a
specific problem with the existing nominees for editor rather than
supposing problems and solutions based on affiliation.

> But that assumes that the HTML WG collaborates with the Forms
> WG on HTML5 forms,
> which is certainly what I believed the charters compelled us to do
> (whether or not you believe it).

   To a degree which I don't believe is well defined in the charter. (Of
course, that's hardly the fault of the Forms Working Group.)

> More generally, I am interested in having requirements drive solutions
> rather than the other way
> around,

   This sounds dangerously close to ignoring existing use cases. People
need to be able to use their existing, pre-build HTML solutions. That
has to be a requirement.

> so that we can first ensure that the requirements really are the
> requirements and how to
> weight them relative to each other.  Seems the best way to avoid
> breaking the future of the web.

   I can see how using false requirements as a basis for a specification
might damage the _future_ Web, but I don't see how that damages the
current one, unless we have a "requirement" that forces us to use
non-gracefully degrading behavior.
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 11:30:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:44 UTC