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

Re: Normative status of author-only view of the HTML5 specification

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 16:28:01 -0700
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <45D4CEA1-CDE8-422D-8321-95EA61F7878E@gbiv.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
On Jun 7, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Jun 7, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> It is a constraint -- as in, the document will not progress without satisfying that constraint.  The TAG carries the full power of the Director.  Consider it a formal objection (made by me) that presumably will be upheld by the Director at some point in the future, unless you can change the TAG's opinion.
>> 
>> Again, we had this discussion already.  The WG agreed to it as a compromise instead of publishing separate specs for the data format and browser behavior.  Why on earth you would want to reopen that can is beyond my understanding, particularly since calling both specs authoritative has no impact whatsoever on the larger spec.
> 
> The Director carries the full power of the Director.

And the Director is a permanent member of the TAG and the TAG makes decisions by consensus.  Figure it out.

> If in time you choose to make a Formal Objection to anything, or anyone else does, then it will be given due consideration and will in due course make its way to the Director.

I already made a formal objection.  It was resolved by Ian's decision to generate an author's view and the TAG's decision that a normative author's view would satisfy my and others' objections.  It's not my fault that the chairs have changed since then and you can't remember the objections that were expressed before the ridiculously baroque decision-making process was created out of thin air.

> However, to be clear, nowhere does the W3C Process give the TAG qua TAG any authority to place "constraints" on Working Groups.

Why do you think the TAG was created?  W3C working groups didn't like receiving the Director's advice at the last step of the process, and TimBL didn't like being viewed as a dictator who had to stand alone every time a WG did something that would screw over other WGs or the Web as a whole.  So a committee was formed that could express such opinions before the end of the WG process.  I was one of the first TAG members, so I know how its decisions effect the process.  You won't find it written down as a separate step within the Process document because it does not need to be.

....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 23:30:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:33 GMT