W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: ISSUE-90, ISSUE-91, ISSUE-93, ISSUE-95, ISSUE-96, ISSSUE-97: (new semantic elements/attributes) - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 14:11:34 -0700
Message-ID: <i2s63df84f1004061411iafca5d4fnc3d91dc1753f101e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> The current status for these issues:
>
> - We have a Working Group draft that includes a number of new semantic
> elements and attributes.
> - We have Change Proposals submitted that propose removing some of these:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removefigure
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removeaside
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removedetails
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removehidden
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removeprogress
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/removemeter
>
> At this time the Chairs would also like to solicit alternate Change
> Proposals (possibly with "zero edits" as the Proposal Details), in case
> anyone would like to advocate the status quo or a different change than the
> specific one in the existing Change Proposal.

I'll offer to write up alternate change proposals for all these
issues. They will propose "zero edits" and provide a rationale for why
I believe that is the right path forward.

However if I recall correctly, Tab Atkins has already offered to write
a "zero edits" proposal for the @hidden attribute. If he still prefers
to do this I'm fine with leaving that attribute out of my proposals.

> During discussion of these proposals, very similar arguments have been
> mustered for and against the submitted proposals. The Chairs believe that a
> single counter-proposal may be sufficient to address all six of these
> issues, and are willing to accept submissions along those lines. Separate
> counter- or alternate proposals will also be accepted.

Ok. I'll keep this in mind. By the time I write the proposal I'll see
if making a single proposal makes sense or not.

I'll note that the argument for removing <progress> and <meter> seems
to be somewhat different and be based around the fact that they are
currently hard to style. So possibly keeping those separate would make
sense.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 21:12:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:16 UTC