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

Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 14:38:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+cz-ZC26Z7k48jgaL4erT3PSkJ1h+3hm3UYdNixYWGsCQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Your position appears to be excessively cynical, and effectively
> > > > attributes bad faith to the WebApps editors trying to move the
> > > > process forward.
> > >
> > > I really see no value in what the WG is doing here.
> >
> > OK, but don't be an impediment for those of us who do see value.
>
> Um, no, it doesn't work that way. This is *actively harming the whole
> point of having a specification*. So yes, I plan to be an impediment.
>
> Maybe you shouldn't be an impediment for those of us who see value in
> having a single canonical version of a spec?
>

I believe, and I expect that the vast majority of the W3C membership
believes, that there should be a single canonical version of the HTML
related specifications, and that the W3C both owns and is responsible for
publishing them.

It sounds like you are suggesting that there is another organization that
is capable of doing this that could and would be accepted by the W3C
Membership as well as other national and international standards
organizations and users.
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2012 21:39:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 5 December 2012 21:39:40 GMT