W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > September 2010

Re: FYI: new NotInW3CSpecYet keyword added to bugzilla

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:15:17 -0700
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, public-html-a11y@w3.org, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>, html4all <talk@html4all.org>
Message-id: <C0A5ED42-C987-40A5-931F-6B5960514763@apple.com>
To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>

On Sep 14, 2010, at 5:11 AM, Laura Carlson wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> The "NotInW3CSpecYet" keyword is a good idea. Thank you, Mike for
> adding it to the W3C's Bugzilla.
> It honestly labels a bug for what it is. The "NotInW3CSpecYet" keyword
> means: "This bug is for a feature that is has not been adopted into
> the W3C version of HTML5 and may never be, and that is not under the
> HTML WG decision policy and may never be."
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describekeywords.cgi
> The HTML Accessibility task force has enough to try to track for the
> time being. If any
> "NotInW3CSpecYet" keywords are removed later the task force can deal
> with them at that time and re-add the "a11y" and "media" keywords that
> you removed if they are needed.
> One question, can other groups now use Bugzilla for related specs if
> they add the "NotInW3CSpecYet" keyword? I'm thinking about Rob Burns'
> HTML 4.1 draft at html4all.
> http://html4all.org/HTMLDraft.html

If Rob wanted to submit this draft to the Working Group, we would give it due consideration. If this draft was accepted as a W3C draft, but Rob wanted to still mantain a separate draft that had some extra material, we would probably be inclined to let bugs on that extra material go in bugzilla too.

Currently, this particular document has no relation to any W3C draft, so it doesn't seem particularly useful to track its issues in W3C space.

Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 14:15:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:55:44 UTC