W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2007

Moving on

From: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2007 12:47:00 +0100
Message-ID: <463F11B4.5070908@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
To: www-html@w3.org, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

At this risk of stating the obvious, I think we are
in grave danger of stalling the whole process simply
because there are too many issues over which there
is contention.  I haven't even /looked/ at the
Xforms debate, because it seems a whole separate can
of worms.  But I do think it might be helpful if
there were a formal mechanism (a second questionnaire)
by which we could vote on each of the disputed areas.
I do not suggest that the results necessarily be
binding, but it might serve to clarify how the
community is divided.  I have in mind something
along the lines of the following :

1) Do you agree that HTML 5 should include all the elements
    and attributes currently allowed in HTML 4.01 Strict ?

1a) If not, specify the elements and/or attributes you
     believe should be dropped, giving reasons.

2) Do you believe that HTML 5 should include all new
    elements and/or attributes that appear in WHATWG HTML5
    but not in HTML 4.01 Strict

2a) If not, specify the elements and/or attributes you
     believe should not be added, giving reasons.

3) Are there elements and/or attributes that you believe
    should appear for the first time in HTML 5 that do
    not currently appear in the WHATWG HTML5 proposal ?

3a) If so, specify the elements and/or attributes that
     you would like to see added, giving reasons.

4) Do you believe that HTML 5 should, for the first time,
    reserve certain class names, with the possibility
    that further class names might be reserved in the future ?

4a) If not, do you believe that a new attribute "role"
     might be defined, with pre-reserved role names ?

5) <etc> (In that these seems to me to be the key issues,
    but being human I have probably overlooked one or more
    vital points).

Philip Taylor
Received on Monday, 7 May 2007 11:47:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:10 GMT