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

Re: OFFICIAL PROTEST - Current Editor's Draft MUST be a W3C document

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:21:41 -0400
Message-ID: <4CC897E5.2020806@intertwingly.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, public-html@w3.org, "'Michael(tm) Smith'" <mike@w3.org>, 'Philippe Le Hegaret' <plh@w3.org>, 'Judy Brewer' <jbrewer@w3.org>, jeff@w3.org
On 10/27/2010 05:01 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 27.10.2010 20:42, John Foliot wrote:
>> Chairs,
>>
>> I must strenuously protest that today the official W3C Editor's Draft
>> Specification (http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/) is currently pointing to
>> the
>> WHATWG specification, which includes a number of items that are
>> specifically *NOT* included in the W3C Draft, including the addition of
>> Microdata (http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#microdata)
>> and references to WebSRT
>> (http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#websrt-cue-text-render
>>
>> ing-rules) - a format in particular that the Accessibility Task Force
>> media sub-team have been persistent and explicit in ensuring *NOT* be
>> added to the Draft Specification at this time.
>>
>> I personally would rather see a black 404 page than to have the W3C
>> pointing to this document, which does not reflect the W3C specification
>> nor it's consensus based approach. At the very least, it should point to
>> the most current W3C Working Draft at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html5-20100624/
>>
>> When specifically can we expect this to be corrected?
>>
>> JF
>
> --> <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11153>
>
> (So Sam doesn't need to advise us to raise bugs :-)

Thanks!

I also would like to draw people's attention to the enhanced change 
control procedures[1] that Ian previously agreed to: "If any Working 
Group member sees a change go into any Last Call-track draft after the 
October 1st cutoff that seems controversial and likely to reduce rather 
than increase consensus, please let the Chairs know and we will make the 
call."

It seems reasonable to conclude that is such a case, but I would like to 
be absolutely sure before proceeding, so if any working group member 
feels like this change needs to be reverted, please say so now.

> Best regards, Julian

- Sam Ruby

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0125.html
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 21:22:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:20 UTC