Re: Working on the "core" HTML spec…

Awesome thanks, I'll be spending some time with this. It sounds like the
recommendation is to develop HTMail as a module within the context of HTML,
and that some work has already been done.

What were the key reasons for its lack of adoption from the W3C and from
vendors? Was it simply incomplete? Insufficient interest?

Dan Black
http://dan.black
917-873-3970


On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Rémi (HTeuMeuLeu) <remi@hteumeuleu.fr>
wrote:

> Hi Chaals,
>
> Thanks for these insights. I totally forgot about the Web Platform
> Incubator Community Group (https://discourse.wicg.io). My main
> interrogation now is : should we continue to discuss of HTMail on this
> platform or on Github ? (or elsewhere ?)
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Rémi
>
>
> 2016-07-12 12:59 GMT+02:00 Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> One thing people might like to do is propose changes to the core HTML
>> specification. Since I co-chair the W3C's Web Platform Working Group who
>> maintains that specification, I thought it might be helpful to explain how
>> that group works… (I'll try to find someone to do the same for CSS)
>>
>> The specification is on github, and the preferred means for feedback is
>> to raise an issue:
>> https://github.com/w3c/html/issues
>> (please do a quick search to see if your issue is already known…)
>>
>> There is at least one issue tagged "HTML email" - a tag I can put onto
>> any issue so we can track them:
>> https://github.com/w3c/html/labels/HTML%20email
>>
>> If your issue is clearly related to email I will tag it.
>>
>> Nothing will be added to the HTML specification unless it has
>> interoperable implementation - before that you should incubate it in an
>> appropriate community such as this one.
>>
>> You should provide some sense of what needs to change in the HTML
>> specification, what problem this solves for whom, who implements the
>> proposal, who supports it, and some test(s) that can be used to work out
>> whether an implementation has done it right.
>>
>> After that there may be a formal "Call for Consensus" of the Working
>> Group, or if there is an obvious consensus it may just be taken up by the
>> editors and added to a milestone.
>>
>> If you are proposing a substantial change, it is helpful if you either
>> join the Working Group, or make an IPR commitment - W3C takes seriously its
>> goal of ensuring that we don't put things in specifications without a
>> Royalty-Free licensing commitment over any IPR. If you're not a W3C member,
>> email me and I can explain the process, which is not very onerous.
>>
>> If you want to float an idea for HTML in front of browser implementors,
>> get help specifying it, etc, you are welcome to do so in the Web Platform
>> Incubator Community Group:
>> https://discourse.wicg.io
>>
>> The Working Group is in the process of finalising HTML 5.1, and beginning
>> work on HTML 5.2. The current plans are to produce a "W3C Recommendation"
>> every year or two, which covers things that are implemented, interoperable,
>> and still agreed to be good ideas. We are also trying to modularise HTML -
>> so if you want to propose a big new thing, it's likely that we'll ask for
>> it as a "module" that can be integrated mostly by reference, rather than
>> adding 7000 lines to the HTML specification itself.
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Chaals
>>
>> --
>> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
>>  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>>
>>
>