- From: <deborah.kaplan@suberic.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:17:28 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- To: Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>
- cc: "Reid, Wendy" <wendy.reid@rakuten.com>, Laurent Le Meur <laurent.lemeur@edrlab.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Benjamin Young <byoung@bigbluehat.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>, Brady Duga <duga@google.com>, Garth Conboy <garth@google.com>, W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Hadrien Gardeur wrote: > This is the wrong focus if the goal is to deliver a specification that will work for the industry in 2019 > instead of 2022. I've been under a misapprehension if our goal is not producing anything that won't be production-ready in industry in 2019. I thought our goal was to deliver the correct spec, not to deliver something that can be delivered, signed off on, and used in the next twelve months. What will work in 2019 is the status quo -- as we know, the status quo is adequate. The little Ivan who sits on my shoulder and talks me down is reminding me that we shouldn't write specs that are unattainable with current web technology. But coming up with a set of specifications based around actual use cases -- like the very real library and academia use case of "put a single book in the CMS or library database, which is a single file, which the student can open in a browser without specialized software" -- isn't something we should just shout down as a pipe dream. Deborah
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2018 21:18:02 UTC