W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > November 2014

Re: WHATWG/W3C collaboration proposal

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:34:59 -0500
Message-ID: <5474BDC3.8080105@intertwingly.net>
To: "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>, Revising W3C Process Community Group <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 11/24/2014 05:17 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 11/21/14 11:59 AM, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I like the idea of using the URL spec as a test case, but I wonder
>> if we shouldn't use this opportunity to go further and try out some
>> of Robin Berjon's ideas (if I recall various TPAC conversations
>> correctly):
>> - having a common GitHub repository for WHATWG and W3C versions of a
>> spec and shipping W3C Recommendations off a "stabilizing" branch
> As noted elsewhere, this may run afoul of the existing W3C Member
> agreements and/or Invited Experts agreements.  I'll follow up with W3
> Legal.
>> - Hosting that repo and the discussion forums for a spec in a
>> neutral venue such as WebPlatform.org to encourage broader
>> participation.
> I checked with the owners of that venue, and they have a separate place
> for specs.  I've added my content there:
> https://github.com/webspecs/url
> I've asked Robin to add this to the index which will cause the spec to
> be generated and published.  Once this is done, I'll provide a link.

This is now live:


I want to be very clear: I am doing this in the hopes that it results in 
broader participation.  IF IT FAILS TO DO SO, I INTEND TO DELETE THIS 

> I am still working with Anne on details as to whether my work can be
> integrated into the WHATWG repository, but I am hopeful that the reverse
> is something we can come to agreement on quickly, namely that the
> content in the WHATWG URL Repository can be merged into the WebSpecs
> repository.

I've checked with Anne, and he is OK with my proceeding.  I plan to 
start on the initial merge in the WebSpecs repository first.

The initial merge is initially likely to be broken in a bunch of ways 
(some obvious, some less so).  I don't want to replace the unbroken spec 
at WHATWG with an inferior version.  My hope is that this situation will 
be only a matter of days.

Once that merge is complete, and approved by Anne, I'll sync the content 
with WHATWG, and actively keep the repositories in sync from that point 

As mentioned previously, I'm voluntarily refraining from pushing this 
work to a W3C repository until the confusion regarding the W3C Member 
and Invited Experts Agreements is resolved.

I'll also note that issues are enabled on the the WebSpecs github 
repository, but that the editors of the URL Standard are using bugzilla 
for tracking.  If an issue is opened on WebSpecs that is both valid and 
not resolvable quickly, I'll open a bugzilla entry for tracking 
purposes.  Discussion can continue in various places, including github 
issues or on Discourse.  You can see that current draft points to bugs, 
and some of those bugs will point to discussions that are anchored 
elsewhere.  It is a web, after all, and there is no "top".

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2014 17:35:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:13 UTC