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

Re: minutes for HTML WG f2f, 2011-11-04, part 1

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2011 22:01:43 -0400
Message-ID: <4EB5EA87.8040900@intertwingly.net>
To: public-html@w3.org
On 11/05/11 8:58 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
>> From the minutes:
>
>> PC: there is further dialog
>>   ... there is a call for change proposals closing today, Nov 4.
>
> I just saw this and likely need another day or two.

The minutes have two lines out of order.  That comment was meant to 
apply to issue 180, which had a call for proposals which closed yesterday:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Oct/0028.html

> I've been drafting
> a change proposal this past week to add back the enhanced time (as
> shown this past Thursday at 11:30) and have continued to update it
> with details (the core functionality is unchanged from what was
> proposed, since the specific feature set had consensus without
> objections from those that advocated keeping<time>)
>
> Here is the URL to the living change proposal to re-add an enhanced
> time element:
>
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Tantekelik/time_element

Given that there has been a revert request, the next step will be to 
identify one or more issues.  Based on the sense of the room, and the 
direction you are taking, it may make sense to split apart the 
discussion of keep/remove/improve the time element and the discussion 
about adding a data element.

The right next step here is to identify one or more issue are.  Once 
that is done, there will be a minimum of 30 days given to allow 
proposals to be created.

> I'd like to also see the<data>  element introduced - there are
> numerous additional uses in microformats for a generic<data>  element
> and we can use it over time to gather data on what other (if any)
> specific elements we could use in the future (rather than
> hypothesizing too many up front). There was also rough consensus in
> the HTML WG f2f *for* adding a data element.

There was rough consensus of the participants in the f2f, but by policy 
we allow asynchronous participation via mailing list.

> Here is the URL to the living change proposal to add a data element:
>
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Tantekelik/data_element
>
> I'll probably need another day or so to have reasonable draft change
> proposals though each has a reasonable outline at this point.
>
> Comments and suggestions for improvements welcome for both change proposals.

I will note that there is one concern that has been identified with the 
definition of the data element as currently specified:

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13240#c72

See the last paragraph in that comment.  Given the sentiment in the room 
in the F2F, if that concern can be addressed and no other concerns are 
voiced, it occurs to me that we could move this forward quickly with a 
Call for Consensus.  Should anybody object, we would give those who do 
an opportunity to produce counter proposals.

> Thanks,
>
> Tantek

- Sam Ruby

> 2011-11-04 Michael[tm] Smith<mike@w3.org>:
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/11/04-html-wg-minutes-part1.html
>>
>> HTML WG f2f,  04 Nov 2011 -- part 1
>>
>>      * Topics
>>          1. Issue 133 Dialog
>>          2. Issue 30 Longdesc
>>          3. issue-164 hgroup
>>          4. short update on the status of the time element
>>          5. issue-179
>>          6. URI/IRI
>>      * Summary of Action Items
>
> (snipped)
>
Received on Sunday, 6 November 2011 02:02:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:41 GMT