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

Re: Proposed adaptive image element

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:20:29 -0700
Cc: Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com>, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <FB94CAA7-E874-4925-A0AF-996E9A89DCAE@apple.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>

On Jul 25, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>> Without commenting on the merits of this particular case, I agree with Ted's
>> comments that in general, we should hold off on adding HTML5 features.
> 
> Why is that just a general comment? I thought HTML5 was in feature
> freeze except for adding accessibility features to complement other
> features that went in before the freeze, but it appears that
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16481 is unresolved, so
> maybe the feature freeze isn't in effect yet. What's the status of the
> feature freeze?

We do intend to enable that policy in the near future; it has been moot during the editorial interregnum. The more relevant policy change is this: <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16674>. As far as we're concerned, we're already open to "too late for new features" as an argument. A proposed new feature would have to meet a very high standard to be included at this point. An example of a reason that may be sufficiently compelling would be missing accessibility functionality for features that are new to HTML5.

That being said, the final decision always belongs to the WG. We can't categorically rule out that the WG would choose to accept a new feature by consensus, even if this delays the spec. But I at least would strongly encourage targeting new feature proposals for HTML.next.

> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18384 has been filed in
> the HTML5 component. I think that's confusing in the light of the
> attempt to get to a feature freeze.

It's a valid choice to put this before the group, but I would recommend moving that bug to HTML.next, if the stakeholders are willing.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 19:20:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:33 UTC