W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Support for the formation of the Web Hypertext Application Technology Community Group (was Re: HTML Working Group Changes)

From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 03:18:57 -0700
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CBBDE1BD.1F706%lrosenth@adobe.com>
On 4/25/12 3:45 PM, "Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:

>IIUC it provides for a legally clean contribution path of WHATWG
>specifications into the W3C.

Then by becoming a CG, that implies that there will no longer be two
separate HTML specifications.  The W3C HTML WG would be 100% responsible
for the official standard and no references to any other "complete"
document calling itself HTML would exist - is that correct?

Instead, the WHATCG would simply develop and publish new material that
does not copy any existing material from the HTML spec - as other CG's do
today.

If so - that sounds like it would indeed address Steve's concerns and
would indeed "reunifying development of the open Web platform under the
stewardship of the W3C.".   If not, then I don't understand what the CG
would be doing??


Leonard

-----------------------
>Since that means that the wider community
>- i.e. those that cannot become a member of the W3C - can continue
>providing input into the specification, I think there's a clear
>advantage to having that CG.
>
>It would be nice if the WHATWG mailing list could just be the WHATCG
>mailing list, including all the legalese around it, but I assume
>that's not so easy to do and may take some time.
>
>Regards,
>Silvia.
>
>On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Steve Faulkner
><faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ted,
>> Initially, like you,  I welcomed the formation of the Web
>> Hypertext Application Technology Community Group, but it has quickly
>>beome
>> clear that the comunity group is only a shell[1], a click through page
>> intended only as a mechanism by which the WHATWG can publish specs with
>>a
>> patent policy.
>>
>> Your statement: "reunifying development of the open Web platform under
>>the
>> stewardship of the W3C."
>> appears false as it does nothing to bridge the gap between the HTML
>> standards development communities at the W3C and WHATWG.
>>
>> This is unfortunate.
>>
>> I still agree with your statement:
>>
>>
>> "Only by working together can we truly lead the Web to its full
>>potential."
>>
>> but the Hypertext Application Technology Community Group appears to be
>> nothing more than a ploy to get microsoft on board at the WHATWG via the
>> provision of a patent policy.
>>
>> [1]
>> 
>>http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-April/035528.htm
>>l
>>      http://blog.whatwg.org/patent-policy
>>
>> regards
>> Stevef
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2012 22:48, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The HTML WG Chairs said that, "as W3C proceeds with its work on
>>> follow-ons to HTML5, W3C and the WHATWG plan to continue their
>>> partnership in developing the right features for the future web."[1]
>>>
>>> With the open membership, straightforward process, and clear IPR policy
>>> provided by Community Groups, we believe this partnership will work
>>>best
>>> if the WHATWG becomes a W3C Community Group as proposed by Ian Hickson
>>> today.[2] Thus, we welcome and support the formation of the Web
>>> Hypertext Application Technology Community Group, reunifying
>>>development
>>> of the open Web platform under the stewardship of the W3C.
>>>
>>> We hope those who have felt, for whatever reason, unable to participate
>>> in the WHATWG will embrace this new Community Group. Only by working
>>> together can we truly lead the Web to its full potential.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Edward O'Connor
>>> eoconnor@apple.com
>>>
>>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Apr/0204.html
>>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Apr/0209.html
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 10:19:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:31 UTC