Re: review of GRDDL by (X)HTML working group(s)?

On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 09:06 +0200, Ivan Herman wrote:
> Hm. I am obviously a bit worried about this, for reasons you cite below.
> This may easily degenerate into a religious debate on microformats vs
> RDF, XML vs. non-XML, and world peace in general...:-(
> 
> Thinking about it... isn't it correct that all the issues that might be
> commented and discussed are typical last call issues? With GRDDL heading
> for PR at the moment, it strikes me as being too late.
> Interested/worried parties had their possibilities to comment...

I'm not sure The Director should support a request for PR
without discharging a dependency on HTML.

> Besides: GRDDL is diligently following the designs and technical
> decision of existing recommendations. Possibly being under the pressure
> for radically changing the GRDDL design on request from a group that did
> not even exist when the GRDDL WG started is, well, possibly inappropriate...

True, the dependency didn't exist when the group started. But
it (arguably) does now.

> Ie, my current feeling is that we can move on without this.
> 
> DanC, thanks for having raised the issue...
> 
> Ivan

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 14:02:57 UTC