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

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

From: Denis Boudreau <dboudreau@webconforme.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:27:29 -0400
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Message-id: <16EBCAB5-3144-405E-9A65-180A3FBD16B8@webconforme.com>
To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, jeff@w3.org, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Chairs,

Major +1 to what John brought up today. 

I sincerely hope John's message gets treated with the importance it deserves.

It's hard to believe that despite the numerous requests to stop linking to the WHATWG's version of the specification, this is still what the W3C showcases/sanctions today.

Pointing to the WHATWG version of the spec is bad for many reasons, one of which being that this is not the current editor's draft. The simple fact this version contains items that have not been adopted as per the W3C's consensus-based approach is simply unacceptable and contrary to the values the W3C has always put forth. 

It could be understandable (but counter-productive nonetheless) if the WHATWG version was explicitly presented as what it truly is, but the public is actually being misled into believing this is the "real" version. That version does not reflect the current state of the draft and in the process, does not reflect the W3C approach we are so fond of. This needs to be corrected.

It also makes me quite uncomfortable as a member of the HTML5-a11y TaskForce, because it boils down to one simple, yet difficult question: who exactly is running the show here?

I do understand how sensitive and political this relationship with WHATWG can be, but the apparent lack of leadership by the W3C in this matter is slowly starting to affect it's credibility in the community. It's regrettable thing and I believe the W3C needs to set the record straight.

So again, who exactly is in charge here? 

When will the W3C make the stand it's expected to make and demand that the editor stops linking to the WHATWG version of the HTML5 specification?

Best regards,

-- 
Denis Boudreau, 
Président-directeur général

WebConforme 
1751 rue Richardson, bureau 6111 
Montréal (Qc), Canada H3K 1G6 
Téléphone : +1 514.448.2650 
dboudreau@webconforme.com 
http://www.webconforme.com/



On 2010-10-27, at 2:42 PM, 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
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2010 21:31:57 UTC

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