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

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

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 15:20:22 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=VogUa=+p5ONDwpU+4gdVwfAMm3Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:45 AM, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> wrote:
> I think that it would be better to shutdown WHATWG version (ie. make
> "living stabdard" dead ;-) and have only one version for reference at
> W3C.

Other people think it would be better to get rid of the W3C version
and keep only the WHATWG version, so we're at a bit of an impasse.

> Maybe W3C people who make deal with WHATWG or those W3C members who are
> also WHATWG members could explain to rest of us why spec is published on
> two places, with slightly different content and why this is the best
> status quo.

It's not, nobody likes it.  But those who prefer the W3C version don't
want it to be axed in favor of the WHATWG version, and those who
prefer the WHATWG version don't want it to be axed in favor of the W3C
version.  Neither side is in a position to overrule the other one, so
we have no realistic way out for the foreseeable future.

Reasons that some people prefer the WHATWG version include (but are
not limited to) that it's unversioned, and it's not subject to HTMLWG
decisions.  Reasons that some people prefer the W3C version include
(but are not limited to) that it's versioned, and it's subject to
HTMLWG decisions.

But discussion in this vein is unlikely to be productive, so I won't
continue on this list beyond this single post.
Received on Friday, 10 June 2011 19:22:18 GMT

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