W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2012

Re: are decisions on what get merged into HTML5 made behind closed doors?

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:03:53 -0500
Message-ID: <50BCB149.9080005@intertwingly.net>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
CC: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Philippe Le H├ęgaret <plh@w3.org>, Michael Smith <mike@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On 12/03/2012 08:48 AM, Laura Carlson wrote:
> The question is one of veracity.
>
> Does the HTMLWG have:
> "two very private lists, where all the decisions about what actually
> gets merged into the spec appear to take place."?
>
> Sam, is that statement:
>
> True or false?
>
> Pick one.

Do you still beat your wife?  Yes or no?  Pick one.

I refuse to play that game.

Categorical statements I will make:  All working group decisions are 
made publicly, and are based on publicly made comments.  All updates 
made to Candidate Recommendation drafts will be made in response to bug 
reports.  The Working Group is provided with ample opportunity to 
request that changes that have not been adequately pre-flighted with the 
group to be reverted.

> Laura
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> On 12/03/2012 05:00 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Chairs,
>>>
>>> The following statement was made recently [1]:
>>>
>>>    "HTMLWG has two very private lists, where all the decisions about what
>>> actually gets merged into the spec appear to take place."
>>>
>>> If this is the case, it appears to be very troubling state of affairs.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate it if the veracity of this statement was confirmed by
>>> the Chairs.
>>
>>
>> Editors, like yourself, make the initial determination as to what goes into
>> specifications.  The chairs ensure that there is ample opportunity for the
>> Working Group to review, comment on, influence, and ultimately overturn
>> editor resolutions when necessary.
>>
>> If you know of any instance where editors have somehow avoided this, please
>> let the chairs know of specifics, and we will investigate.  Here is a
>> history of revert requests:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/revert-requests.html
>>
>> Here are the processes we are following for extension specifications:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#cr
>>
>> To date, no extension specification has been nominated for inclusion.
>>
>> And here is the process that we will hopefully shortly be following for CR:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#cr
>>
>> - Sam Ruby
>>
>>
>>> [1] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20121201#l-144
>>>
>>> --
>>> with regards
>>>
>>> Steve Faulkner
>>> Technical Director - TPG
>>>
>>> www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> |
>>> www.HTML5accessibility.com <http://www.HTML5accessibility.com> |
>>> www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner <http://www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner>
>>>
>>> HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
>>> dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ <http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/>
>>>
>>> Web Accessibility Toolbar -
>>> www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
>>> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 3 December 2012 14:04:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 3 December 2012 14:04:29 GMT