RE: Editorial patches staged for merge week 49

>All new content in a HTML5.1 spec is only proposed until the spec goes to CD

What do you mean by "CD"?

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Silvia Pfeiffer
Sent: 09/12/2012 12:31 AM
To: Sam Ruby
Cc: public-html-admin@w3.org
Subject: Re: Editorial patches staged for merge week 49



On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net<mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> wrote:
On 12/08/2012 04:40 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

So, wrt extension specs: the way I understand them is that they are for
the HTML5 spec: they specify features that somebody hopes to still get
into HTML5, rather than HTML5.1 [1].

[1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html

I disagree.  See:

"During this process, we will encourage modularity as a preferred way to approach introducing new features into the 5.1 release."

Reference:

http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html#html5.1-milestones


Sure, modularity is a good way to introduce big features. But what about small features?

I don't think we want to go to the extent of making every single patch an extension spec. All new content in a HTML5.1 spec is only proposed until the spec goes to CD - actually really until it goes to REC, but with more rigorous weeding of features from about CD on. I don't see it practical until CD to work with an extension spec for every change, or even every new small feature.

Any big feature - such as the introduction of encrypted media - is certainly better introduced through a separate spec. However, there is a difference between a modular new spec and an extension spec as for HTML5.

Silvia.