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

RE: New round of Working Drafts (was Re: New split-out drafts)

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:58:55 -0800
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D5FED2F@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
> >   http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/
> > 
> > This draft is pending some changes in line with my last e-mail to make 
> > it a standalone draft that just happens to be layered on top of W3C 
> > HTML5.
> 
> This is the only thing the Chairs are waiting on before posting a new 
> CfC to publish a fresh round of Working Drafts. Ian told me offline that 
> he plans to do this work on Saturday. If it's done by then, a new Call 
> for Consensus will be posted Monday.

> Done. Sorry for the delay.

> Let me know if there's anything I can do to improve it further. I'm not 
> 100% clear on what exactly needed doing.

As I noted previously, I don't think W3C HTML WG should commit
to working on or publishing microdata at this time, without
resolving the overall issue of extensibility or Microdata
vs RDFa vs. both.

To the question of whether to publish the document in W3C
as a FPWD (given that the document has been widely announced
as available from WHATWG anywhere) I think at a minimum it
needs analogous edits as went into the RDFa document:

http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/

OLD:
==========
The publication of this document by the W3C as a W3C Working Draft does not imply that all of the participants in the W3C HTML working group endorse the contents of the specification. Indeed, for any section of the specification, one can usually find many members of the working group or of the W3C as a whole who object strongly to the current text, the existence of the section at all, or the idea that the working group should even spend time discussing the concept of that section.

...

The W3C HTML Working Group is the W3C working group responsible for this specification's progress along the W3C Recommendation track. This specification is the 29 January 2010 Editor's Draft.

==================
NEW:

The publication of this document by the W3C as a W3C Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the majority of members of the W3C HTML working group or the W3C as a whole. In particular,

* There are one or more alternate methods of adding data without using microdata, such as [RDFa]
* There are discussions of alternate extensibility mechanisms, covered in [issue-41], which might allow other ways of integrating microdata.
* There is concern that continued development of this document within W3C would belong in a different working group chartered to focus on the topic.

...

This specification was developed in the WHATWG, and is currently being published also by the W3C HTML Working Group to further discussions within W3C.
Received on Friday, 29 January 2010 21:59:27 GMT

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