Here is a summary of the
objections to this six drafts proposed for publication and their
status. It is being sent in HTML format because it was too hard to
format it legibly otherwise. Hope that is ok with all your mail clients.
The original call for consensus can be found here:
We have not yet ruled on "all specifications" wording nor on Krzysztof
or Martin's objections. Nor has Julian verified that Manu's changes
satisfy his concern. The team is seeking the Director's advice on
To the best of our knowledge, the following are the open objections
on each draft. In each case we do not yet know whether the objection
has been resolved to the satisfaction of the objector, or we have a
statement from the objector that it hasn't been.
HTML: The Markup Language
HTML5 differences from HTML4
HTML Canvas 2D Context
The following are for the historical record - we believe all of
these objections have been addressed to the satisfaction of the
HTML Canvas 2D Context
The Working Group has yet to completely resolve the issue of what
should be recommended for the status sections of the documents in
question. The chairs are confident that this question could be
addressed, but note that there has been widespread confusion on this
issue. Therefore we feel that it would be ideal if we could resolve
all or even some of the scope questions before these documents are
published. In particular, we feel that it would be unfortunate to
publish a document just to find out days later that it was considered
out of scope.
Accordingly, we would appreciate either an expeditious response to
Larry's inquiries (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0360.html
or an outlook on when such a response will be made. If the request can
be handled quickly, we would rather wait for the response. If not, we
will find an alternate way to proceed.
Without in any way precluding future splits or even movement of
responsibilities between working groups such has happened in the past
between the HTML Working Group and the WebApps Working Group, what we
would specifically like immediate clarification on is the following:
- As of 1Q 2010, would a deliverable of a "Canvas 2D Context"
document be considered in scope for the HTML Working Group?
- As of 1Q 2010, would a deliverable of a "HTML+RDFa" document be
considered in scope for the HTML Working Group?
- As of 1Q 2010, would a deliverable of a "HTML Microdata" document
be considered in scope for the HTML Working Group?
- Sam Ruby, on behalf of all three co-chairs