W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Reference to the HTML specification

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 11:36:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL1nonJDen_VX1dt51hDLDpNy7qSasCv7BHcGr464soMoPuxjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> wrote:
> On 8/5/2011 9:23 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>  It should be left to the editor's (or working group) discretion as
>>>> >> to which spec they cite regardless of the reason.
>>>
>>> >
>>> >  And one of the role of the W3C staff is to ensure proper coordination
>>> >  between the various Working Groups at the W3C. I'm pointing out we are
>>> >  being inconsistent,
>>
>> I'm still not sure what the problem is. It seems like the problem is
>> that some people feel the citing a WHATWG spec is "disrespectful" of
>> the HTML WG. I think we should get on with making the best possible
>> technology for our fellow humans and not get so caught up with who is
>
> There have been chair decisions which the WHATWG does not follow, many
> of them having to do with accessibility requirements. By continuing to link
> to the WHATWG spec as a primary source, during such fractures in consensus,
> it undermines the decision processes of the w3c.

I thought that the WHATWG is an independent consortium; if so, it has
no obligation to follow any decisions made by the HTML-WG.

-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 8 August 2011 09:36:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:47 GMT