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

Re: Design Principles

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 15:45:56 -0700
Cc: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <801ACC63-6B89-4CDA-9382-2584ABDDF487@apple.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>

On May 24, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Larry Masinter wrote:

>
> Maciej wrote:
>
>> So, I would object to publishing a version that says the group has no
>> plans to take the document further, until and unless we have clear
>> consensus on that point.
>
> I don't think the process allows an editor of a document
> to delay meeting the heartbeat requirement.

The heartbeat requirement is per-WG not per-draft. Our WG hasn't been  
in 100% compliance with the heartbeat requirement but we have been  
pretty close.



>
> One way or another, we need to focus on getting documents
> out for which the working group has agreement, even if
> it is an agreement-to-disagree.
>
> To offer a positive suggestion which might allow us to
> make progress, I suggest changing the title of the document
> to be:
>
> "Some Design Principles Guiding HTML Development"
>
> I suggest an Abstract/Introduction:
>
>  "This document describes some of the Design Principles
>   used in discussions of the development of HTML5. The
>   principles offer guidance for the design of HTML in the
>   areas of compatibility, utility and interoperability.
>
>  There was substantial agreement on most of these design
>  principles, although some difference of opinions remain.
>  In particular, there were some objections that some of
>  the examples unnecessarily bias support for particular
>  putative HTML 5 features or element.
>
>  Further work on the Design Principles was deferred
>  so the Working Group could focus on the contents
>  of the technical work rather than continuing to
>  debate the Design Principles themselves."
>
> With such a change (or something to similar effect)
> to the title/abstract, I would favor publication of
> the document as a Working Group Note.

I think your proposed abstract is largely an improvement, although I  
don't think it's necessary to mention dissent about the examples. I  
think even with your new abstract, "HTML Design Principles" would  
remain a fine and accurate title. No document of this type is  
exhaustive.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Sunday, 24 May 2009 22:46:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:37 GMT