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

Re: Who is the Intended Audience of the Markup Spec Proposal?

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:34:57 -0800
Message-ID: <63df84f0901301134t79541fcancbc5db4dec922c54@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Henri,
>
> On Jan 30, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for sharing this with the WG. (Others in the WG may also be
>> interested in the IRC discussion from yesterday logged at:
>> http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20090129#l-116 )
>>
>> It bothers me that it wasn't stated up front that private feedback in
>> general and from the W3C Team in particular was a major motivating factor
>> behind "HTML 5: The Markup Language". (Or if this has been stated before, I
>> haven't properly noticed it.)
>>
>> The HTML5 effort has been criticized for Hixie taking private feedback
>> into account in his editing of "HTML 5". However, Hixie has at least readily
>> disclosed that private feedback has motivated notable editing choices.
>>
>> Given the recent suggestion that the WG needs some ground rules for taking
>> on new drafts, I'd like to suggest that one of the ground rules be that
>> editors disclose to the WG when a draft or a section of a draft comes into
>> existence in response to private feedback the whole group isn't seeing. (Of
>> course, I'd prefer even more openness.)
>
> As long as Ian Hickson is the editor of the main deliverable, I don't think
> we're going to get more openness. He's made it clear that he wants all
> decisions made within the confines of his own mind, with no "others"
> undermining that process. As long as that is the modus operandi for the WG,
> openness is the most inappropriate word imaginable to describe the
> activities of this WG.

If that is the case I strongly disagree with such a decision process.
Can you point out where either Hixie or someone else said that this is
the process we use, or where a formal or informal decision was made
within the WG to allow for such a decision process.

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 30 January 2009 19:35:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:00 UTC