W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: HTML5-warnings - request to publish as next heartbeat WD

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:50:10 +0300
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <76F1B326-F5A0-4E14-A9E4-28D1EEE02651@iki.fi>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
On Aug 10, 2009, at 03:50, Manu Sporny wrote:

> Basically we have Ian's HTML5 proposal (A) and we have the
> HTML5-warnings proposal (A+B). Since HTML5-warnings is just Ian's
> proposal with a bunch of warnings, it seems sort of redundant to  
> publish
> both proposals since by publishing HTML5-warnings, we publish Ian's
> proposal by inclusion.

If someone wanted to edit http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/ to include  
a warning stating that the spec is not applicable to text/html, and  
that HTML 5 specifies microdata which addresses the use case space of  
RDFa with a simpler processing model, without a variant of the qnames- 
in-content pattern, without prefix-based indirection and without  
requiring (while allowing) the use of URIs as identifiers, would you  
be OK with such an edit if the resulting document still contained  
what's currently in rdfa-syntax by inclusion?

> Ian Hickson wrote:
>> If the idea is to mark up all the issues where someone disagrees,  
>> then
>> there are a number of other sections we should mark...
> The idea is not to mark up all of the issues where someone disagrees.
> One of the ideas is to mark up the issues that seem to involve current
> or potential disagreement in larger communities both inside and  
> outside
> of the WHAT WG and HTML WG (such as other W3C groups, IETF groups, or
> other standards bodies).

It seems to me the idea of the draft is to deliver

The warnings seem rather arbitrary. They don't seem to reflect the  
chair-maintained issue list nor do they seem to have any other common  
theme that could be identified to form objectively-applied inclusion  
criteria. I don't support the publication of a draft that seemingly  
arbitrarily casts doubt over sections of HTML 5.

Henri Sivonen
Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 08:50:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:49 UTC