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

On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 10:51 -0400, Harry Halpin wrote:
> While I understand Ivan's concerns, I think there is a large point and 
> then two ramifications:
> 
>   We *should not*  formally ask for reviews,

Really? It's pretty clear to me that we should; indeed, that we did
when we went to last call and CR.

>  but we should probably at 
> least  bring GRDDL to their attention. This should be done by e-mailing 
> the chairs and telling them to forward the announcement that we are going to 
> PR in July, and that while we are not formally requesting comments, now is 
> the time to put in any last minute comments.

I don't understand why you say "not formally requesting comments."

If you're suggesting that a PR request that doesn't show review
by these WGs is complete, I'm not convinced.

>   1) A review by (X)HTML should be uncontroversial. Therefore, I will 
> e-mail their chair today to "bring it to his attention".
> 
>   2) A review by HTML WG could be controversial. The main point of bringing 
> GRDDL to their attention would be ask them to politely *not* remove 
> profile, since other standards (i.e. GRDDL) use it. Therefore, I suggest 
> that we carefully phrase an e-mail to the chair of the HTML WG saying to 
> forward a message from the GRDDL Working Group that is about to go to PR 
> and that uses "profile" attribute. Therefore, in any future arguments the 
> HTML WG has, there will be some ammunition for those who want to keep the 
> "profile" attribute in HTML.

That seems like a reasonable thing to do; I'm not sure whether it's
enough, though.

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

Received on Saturday, 23 June 2007 18:34:28 UTC