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

Re: Change Proposals and FPWD Resolutions

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:53:12 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912090853h724256dfqfcd70e223d495689@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>> There should be one clean straw poll vote: leave microdata in, or remove
>> it
>
> This is not intended to be a vote.  See:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0273.html
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0245.html
>
> In particular:
>
> "We will not do any numerical counting all the votes. All we
> will look at is the objections and rationale presented"
>
> - Sam Ruby
>

Then I would assume you're looking at the rationale given for whether
Microdata is left in the HTML5 spec, because there has been little or
no discussion about publishing Microdata as a separate specification.
Why? Because we haven't resolved the issue of whether Microdata will
remain in HTML5 or not.

I don't equate support for Microdata in HTML5 as equivalent to support
for Microdata as a separate specification.

Our change proposals should focus on specific, focused actions. When I
wrote the dt/dd change proposal, I focused on removing dt/dd from
figure and details, and since that left a gap, proposed an
alternative. This, even though I don't like details, I think it's
redundant functionality to what we have today, and I'm not
particularly overjoyed with figure.

However, proposing removing or altering details and figure, in
addition to the dt/dd change, would have just muddied the change
proposal -- it would have merged multiple actions into one proposal,
making it difficult to determine if those who supported the proposal
did because dt/dd were removed from figure and details, or because
people agree with removing or modifying figure and details.

What I did, instead, is start separate actions for both figure and
details, apart from the issue of dt/dd. This way people can express
support for or against removing dt/dd and creating a new element for
captioning in both, separate from the action for removing details, and
separate from how figure is handled. It may seem like a lot of extra
work for the group, a lot of extra discussion, but it's really a way
of cleanly separating actions for each change proposal.

Returning to Microdata, those who may want Microdata pulled from the
HTML5 spec may not care if its published or pursued individually. But
some may care that it is actively pursued, because it generates
conflicted direction in the W3C. That's two separate things, though.
The first is, whether Microdata is removed or not. Then, if it is
removed, what to do with it.

I really hope we encourage clarity and specificity of action with our
change proposals going forward.

Shelley
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 16:53:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:11 UTC