W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2011

Re: HTML.next and Rechartering

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:12:22 +0000
Message-ID: <993639764-1313028744-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-246731324-@b27.c18.bise6.blackberry>
To: "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>,"Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "HTML WG LIST" <public-html@w3.org>
I tend to agree with Sylvia, and furthermore, am not convinced that the current feature set of HTML5 is a good "checkpoint" by any measure (implementation, feature stability, etc.) both from a perspective of features in the draft and features outside the draft.

I think letting HTML5 evolve a bit longer and seeing if there is a convergence point among implementations and what features are or are not supported would be a better approach. 

I don't think a spec-wide "Last Call" draft or period helps this purpose and thus perhaps that aspect/phase of the process should itself be called into question.



-----Original Message-----
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Sender: public-html-request@w3.org
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:34:26 
To: Maciej Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com>
Cc: HTML WG LIST<public-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: HTML.next and Rechartering

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> Hello Working Group,
> Now that the Last Call period is over, it's a good time to start thinking about the next steps in the evolution beyond HTML5.
> There are a few ways we can start thinking and talking more about HTML.next:
> 1) Let's start up some discussion and collection of post-HTML5 feature ideas.
> 2) Though we cannot yet publish post-HTML5 deliverables as Working Drafts, nothing stops us from creating Editor's Drafts. So current editors and anyone else who is interested are encouraged to create post-HTML5 proposed Editor's Drafts for consideration, in parallel with the versions working their way through the LC process.
> 3) To be able to publish post-HTML5 delieverables, we will have to change the charter of the Working Group. There are two possible tracks we can take:
>    A) Come up with a detailed definition of the requirements, scope, and expectations for our next-generation deliverables, and cast that as a new charter.
>    B) Update the current charter and give a fairly loosely defined scope for post-HTML5 deliverables.
> Option A is much more clear about the next phase of our work, which is helpful in some ways, but it may require longer discussion to be clear about the scope. Option B likely requires less careful wording and negotiation. There is some interest in completing rechartering by the time of TPAC 2011. To achieve that, we'd have to have a draft charter ready in 3-5 weeks. We have W3C staff members who can help with the drafting.

Realistically, in 3-5 weeks, I don't think you can achieve 3.A) . Also
I wonder why we'd want to put a restriction on the features that we
want to add to HTML5. I think it's more productive to keep the
features open and just continue working on the spec. Which is in fact
already happening at WHATWG and it's good to stay in sync.


Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 02:12:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:16 UTC