W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2008

Re: An HTML language specification vs. a browser specification

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:39:21 -0500
Message-ID: <492076E9.8020208@mit.edu>
To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
CC: public-html@w3.org

Robert J Burns wrote:
> I think this question of "who will edit?"  that keeps coming up is a 
> complete red herring.

Not at all, since your argument hinges on claiming that the current 
editor is not up to the task.

> As a WG, I am confident we could find competent 
> editors for all of this

You're a lot more opimistic than is warranted, in my opinion.

> We have a spec that continues to grow without bound. We have 
> an editor who is extremely competent when it comes to browser behavior 
> issues, but not so much when it comes to parsing and HTML vocabulary 
> (markup and DOM).

You have repeatedly claimed this.  Yet you cannot actually name a single 
person who would be more competent when it comes to parsing, as far as I 
can tell.  That makes it very difficult to see how your proposed 
approach would be better.

> So if we decide to split these things up, I'm 
> confident we can find editors to step forward to take on these tasks. 

I'm not.  Now what?

> The key thing is that we would be able to make the draft(s) serve the 
> needs of users and authors and not only a few browser implementors.

Good luck getting consensus on any of that, then.  Or better yet, 
implementations...

Note that the draft(s) do need to serve all three constituencies, but 
they also need to be implementable.  The other option, of course, is to 
retrace the steps of XHTML2.

-Boris
Received on Sunday, 16 November 2008 19:40:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:59 UTC