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

Re: ISSUE-59: normative-language-reference FPWD

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:52:35 +0000
Message-ID: <55687cf80901230952y3ff4a385j71f3a87248c301c1@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

Larry wrote:
> I am in favor of making the document "HTML 5: The Markup Language" available
> for wider review by the W3C membership and public as a First Public Working Draft,
> following the open standards process in the W3C.
>
> I suggest that the editor first add to "Status of this Document" a note that
> there is some controversy within the HTML working group about the intended
> status of this document as a normative reference, and about its relationship
> with the other Editor's Draft also published by the working group.


I agree with larry,
there are  aspects of the "HTML5: AVaAAfHaX" that are contentious, and
for which no agreement has been reached, but this does not stop its
publication.
whether "HTML 5: The Markup Language" becomes a normative document or
not is a question for the future, it does not have to be decided now.
while, the question of what "audience" is a red herring, let it be
published as a draft for public comment and see if there is an
audience that finds it useful.

let's get it out there.

regards
stevef


2009/1/23 Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>:
>
> I am in favor of making the document "HTML 5: The Markup Language" available
> for wider review by the W3C membership and public as a First Public Working Draft,
> following the open standards process in the W3C.
>
> I suggest that the editor first add to "Status of this Document" a note that
> there is some controversy within the HTML working group about the intended
> status of this document as a normative reference, and about its relationship
> with the other Editor's Draft also published by the working group.
>
> I think the attempts to maneuver the resolution of this controversy by objecting
> to the publication of the document for wider review as a FPWD are inappropriate
> and counter to the goals of an open standards process.  The entrenched positions
> of the vocal members of the committee are known. It's time to ask for wider
> feedback.
>
> Michael Smith has edited a document which has the appearances of being a valuable
> reference and which seems to be a desirable specification from the point of view
> of a substantial subset of the web community.  Publish it.
>
> Larry
> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
>
>
>
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Friday, 23 January 2009 17:53:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:28 GMT