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

Re: HTML.next and Rechartering

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:55:19 -0400
Message-ID: <4E43D137.2080902@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html@w3.org
On 08/10/2011 10:12 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> 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.

Do either of you have any specific features in mind?  Can you please 
verify that there are existing bug reports and/or that these features 
are added to the wiki page:

http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next

> 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.

We proceeded to Last Call based on the results of the following poll:

http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/html5-last-call-poll/results

I do encourage both of you to participate any such polls that we might 
have in the future.

> Thanks,
>
> Tantek

- Sam Ruby

> -----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.
>
> Silvia.
>
http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 12:55:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:27 UTC