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.

Summary

The original call for consensus can be found here:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0262.html
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 Larry's question.

Open Objections

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.

HTML5

(None)

HTML: The Markup Language

(None)

HTML5 differences from HTML4

(None)

HTML Microdata

HTML Canvas 2D Context

HTML+RDFa

Resolved Objections

The following are for the historical record - we believe all of these objections have been addressed to the satisfaction of the objector.

HTML Microdata

HTML Canvas 2D Context

Scope Questions

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