- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 18:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'Silvia Pfeiffer'" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "'Sean Hayes'" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "'HTML Accessibility Task Force'" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > > Hi Sean, > > I agree with what you say. However, I think what we need is > to get the spec text into the draft, so we can provide feedback > / register bugs / have discussions on the mailing list to have > these things changed. The adoption of the text into the W3C spec > from the WHATWG spec may otherwise not happen. Also, another big > argument for getting these edits would be if implementations simply > didn't support them. > > Alternatively, what we could do is to pick up the spec and do these > changes ourselves and add them to the W3C change proposal process. > I'm not sure how constructive that is though. <co-chair hat off> Hi Silvia, I think that everyone is aware of both the sense of urgency here as well as the fact that the WHAT WG has diverged their HTML5 specification from that of the W3C in more than one place, but IMHO we cannot let that be our principle guidance here. I do not believe that it is beyond the realm of reasonable to ask the chairs to ask the editor to make the edits that are being proposed (if we are in agreement on these edits - which we have not fully determined yet), and if the editor is unable or unwilling to do so then we can take on that task ourselves and ask the Chairs to work with us there. The last thing we need or want however is to be working with a perceived WHAT WG gun at our heads - this to me is neither productive nor useful. I think that we are all generally of a mind that having WebSRT referenced is not what we want at this time, so at a very minimum there will already be a difference there, so any other edits will simply be supplemental to that basic point. Let's not say can't, let's say how. JF
Received on Friday, 10 September 2010 01:35:57 UTC