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

Re: clarification on Adobe Blocking

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:03:50 -0500
Message-ID: <4B756DD6.2040203@intertwingly.net>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Shelley Powers wrote:
> At least two members of this team, Ian Hickson[1] and Anne van 
> Kesteren[2], representing Google and Opera, respectively, have been 
> writing this morning that Adobe is officially blocking publication of 
> HTML5. This type of communication could cause FUD among the community of 
> users, and should be addressed as soon as possible.
> 
> There was something in the minutes yesterday about a formal objection 
> from Larry Masinter [3], but the emails in this regard went to a 
> protected email list. However, Larry has discussed in the www-archive 
> list[4], a publicly accessible list, his objections to the publication 
> of Microdata, the RDFa document, and the Canvas 2D API, but not the 
> HTML5 document, itself. And the concerns I've read in this list have to 
> do with charter and scope -- a reasonable concern, I feel. Others of us 
> have also expressed a similar concern. 
> 
> An unfortunate consequence of lumping multiple documents into one CfC is 
> that there is some confusion about when an action or objection is made 
> against one, it seems to be against all. Yet, and co-chairs, correct me 
> if I'm wrong, but we can object to any one of the documents, and it 
> won't hold up up the publications of the others. The lump CfC was a 
> procedural short cut, not an actual formal grouping. 
> 
> As far as we know of, there is no Formal Objection blocking the 
> publication of HTML5...correct?

I can only say that my understanding is incomplete.  I was not copied on 
the Formal Objection, and while Paul requested that Larry post the 
substance of his objection on public-html yesterday, and Larry indicated 
that he would do so, to the best of my knowledge this has not been done.

The best I can piece together the substance can be found here (member only):

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2010Feb/0100.html

Ultimately, it appears that the original request can be found here:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/1436.html

And there was a related, but brief discussion which can be found here:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Feb/0006.html

I have yet to find any bug reports related to this matter.  If anybody 
finds one, I would appreciate a link.  Additionally, if anybody can find 
a way to achieve amicable resolution of this matter with Larry and 
Adobe, I encourage them to do so.

> Shelley
> 
> [1] http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1265967771&count=1 
> <http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1265967771&count=1>
> [2] http://twitter.com/annevk/status/9002695479
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/11-html-wg-minutes.html#item07
> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Feb/0002.html

- Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 15:04:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:01 GMT