Re: suggested process for adding new features to HTML 5.1

On 10 December 2012 14:01, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>wrote:

> Again I disagree. This puts too much pressure on an exploratory draft,
> whose function should be to get a given feature specification to the level
> of spec quality where it *could* be incorporated, without prejudging that
> decision.
>
> Allowing this automatic transition is likely to lead to the sort of
> arguments we have seen where people want to stop everyone else from even
> working on a proposal - one of the most anti-productive games of process
> politics I have seen in this environment.
>

I have no issue with separating the request to add to html 5.1 from
publishing of extension spec working drafts, I guess whether a request to
add needs to be decided by a CFC depends on how well the current less
formal system for adding features works out.

-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html