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

Re: Proposal to publish HTML5 and vocab specs

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:27:10 -0400
Message-ID: <4AE862CE.5010104@intertwingly.net>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
Shelley Powers wrote:
>>
>> My advice to everybody is spend more time pushing *for* features and aspects
>> that you like, and only spend time pushing *against* features or aspects
>> that you can't live with.
> 
> And that's what we're doing. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise.

Shelley, I agree that's what you are doing, and I appreciate it.

As to why I might think others may not be doing likewise, I submit:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/1039.html

To all: if there are features that need to be split out, but can 
continue as independent specs, we need change proposals for such.  And 
if the rationale for such split is stronger than the rationale for 
keeping it in, then a split will be what we will do.

I'm aware of such a change proposal for Microdata.  I'm aware of work 
being done to split out canvas, and this needs a consolidated set of 
rationale, ideally in the form of a change proposal.

Are there other sections that need to be removed or split out?  If so, 
now would be an ideal time to bring them forward, ideally first as bugs, 
and then as issues if the resolution is not satisfactory.  If not, why 
are we having this discussion?

>>> BR, Julian
>> - Sam Ruby
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0981.html
> 
> Shelley

- Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 28 October 2009 15:27:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:51 GMT