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 14:00:59 -0400
Message-ID: <4E4418DB.4020901@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html@w3.org
On 08/11/2011 01:38 PM, Simpson, Grant Leyton wrote:
> Dear All,
> One question I have--one that is in my opinion important to a discussion
> of pursuing a revised charter--is how work on the next version of HTML by
> this WG will relate to work done by WHATWG. WHATWG has referred to the
> HTML5 work done heretofore as a "snapshot" of their "living" HTML. Is that
> the model we as a WG want to follow? Would the next iteration of HTML from
> the W3C track WHATWG work?

What do you propose?

My suggestion is that this discussion be pursued at a more fine grained 

If there are features that are in the WHATWG spec that nobody ever 
proposes be include in a W3C spec then those features likely will never 
appear in an W3C spec.

If there are features that in the WHATWG spec that people do propose be 
included in a W3C spec, there will be ample opportunity provided for 
people to comment on the proposal and, should they wish to, object.  If 
it works out that that there is such a proposal and there is no 
objections, such material will be included.

If there are features that people wish to propose to be included in a 
HTML.next deliverable that never appeared in any WHATWG spec, then again 
ample opportunity will be provided for people to comment on the proposal 
and, should they wish to, object.  Again, if it works out that that 
there is such a proposal and there is no objections, such material will 
be included.

My assessment is that what is in the WHATWG spec currently is a likely 
indicator of what might be included in a future W3C spec, but not a 
guarantee.  Technical differences base on actual disagreements will be 
relatively few and fully documented.  Any remaining difference will be 
due to a lack of participation, and again will be fully documented.

My suggestion meanwhile is to populate the wiki and participate in the 
calls for proposals and calls for consensus:


> Best,
> Grant

- Sam Ruby

> On 8/10/11 6:57 PM, "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.
>> The Chairs welcome discussion of any or all of these topics. This will
>> also be a discussion item at this week's telecon.
>> Regards,
>> Maciej
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 18:01:39 UTC

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