- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:11:28 +0000
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-html-admin@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+VnSpnPdjk_1-BJ1GOhP3gavMKW9Y1kCBoBAvUoUP=Vnsg@mail.gmail.com>
A suggestion: when an extension spec reaches FPWD status an editor can make a request that it be included in HTML 5.1 any thoughts? regards Steve On 8 December 2012 10:35, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Silvia, > > >Sorry, I wasn't clear enough: these criteria are only applied when the > spec goes to REC. We have a mandate in the HTML WG to work with the WHATWG > and >that's what we are doing here. > > While I agree we should be working with the WHATWG, the updated charter > talks in these terms[1] > > "The HTML Working Group will consider proposals for future specifications > from Community Groups, encouraging open participation within the bounds of > the W3C patent policy and available resources." > > Which does not indicate to me that proposed new features that originate > from the WHATWG spec are automatically added to HTML 5.1 > > I also think we need to consider cases where there are competing proposals > for a feature (example srcset vs picture) > > aside: I could not find the data element in 5.1 that is present in the > WHATWG spec? > > regards > SteveF > > [1] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/#liaisons > > > On 8 December 2012 10:14, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> hi Silvia, >>> >>> I have no issue with the current process for bug fixes and editorial >>> changes etc. >>> >>> >I think ultimately it's the W3C process document that answers this: >>> interoperably implemented features in multiple UAs, right? HTML5.1 is not >>> really HTML5.1 >until it reaches REC and before then anything can happen. >>> >>> 5.1 already includes features that do not meet these criteria, I would >>> like to have a clear process for how these features are added regardless of >>> their origin. >>> >> >> Sorry, I wasn't clear enough: these criteria are only applied when the >> spec goes to REC. We have a mandate in the HTML WG to work with the WHATWG >> and that's what we are doing here. >> >> >> >The WHATWG makes progress on features because of bugs being registered >>> there and discussions happening on their mailing list and irc channels. >>> These >discussions generally stem from browser vendors or Web developers. >>> >>> This can and does occur in the w3c space as well. So I take it new >>> features can be added to the 5.1 working draft by filing bugs and >>> discussion in the working group. >>> >> >> Absolutely!! In fact, it would be great if we had more technical >> discussions on the list! >> >> Regards, >> Silvia. >> >> >> >>> >>> regards >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> On 8 December 2012 09:56, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> I think ultimately it's the W3C process document that answers this: >>>> interoperably implemented features in multiple UAs, right? HTML5.1 is not >>>> really HTML5.1 until it reaches REC and before then anything can happen. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
Received on Saturday, 8 December 2012 11:12:37 UTC