W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 8833] Please allow the title of the spec currently known as "HTML5" to be changed to an accurate title.

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:16:59 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NhFnv-0001Rb-Pj@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8833





--- Comment #5 from Dean Edridge <dean@dean.org.nz>  2010-02-16 05:16:59 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > The HTML WG has formally decided to publish this specification under the name
> > > "HTML5". See <http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/htmlbg/results#xname>.
> > > 
> > 
> > Why are you telling me this? It is irrelevant, I am well aware of that survey,
> > I voted against the "HTML5" title and if others knew that the spec wasn't
> > "HTML5" they would have too. Just because there has been a survey does not mean
> > that the problem is solved, quite the opposite. The survey question was: "Shall
> > the W3C's next-generation HTML specification be named "HTML 5"?" The
> > specification never has been the next-generation HTML specification, HTML5 is
> > just a small part of it. Also, survey results are not binding.
> 
> Based on that survey and further discussion, we had a Working Group Decision to
> name the speification HTML5. Per the W3C Process, decisions may only be
> reopened if there is new information:
> <http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#WGChairReopen>
> 
> Do you have new information to provide that was not available at the time of
> the original Working Group Decision to publish a Working Draft named HTML5?

You know very well that I do, I mentioned it along with a dozen other reasons
back in January 2008, I'm still waiting to hear back from the HTML WG or the
editor on the issue.

> 
> 
> > Due to a conflict of interest, and/or interference in the past, the following
> > people will need to step aside and let the rest of the HTML WG resolve this
> > issue.
> > 
> > Ian Hickson, Google, Inc.
> > Maciej Stachowiak, Apple, Inc.
> > David Hyatt, Apple, Inc.
> 
> Any individual is free to have an opinion on the matter. If the issue is
> re-raised, it is extremely unlikely that the Chairs will forbid any particular
> individual to speak their mind, unless they cannot keep their communications
> professional.

You mean like how "some people" have done everything they can to make sure the
issue doesn't get resolved Maciej? Yes I understand. Some people stand to
benefit from it not being fixed Maciej, you know...


> 
> > I filed a bug report for this issue due to the fact that I've been ignored in
> > the past. I've left the bug as "needsinfo" (not sure what else to use). I'd be
> > happy to discuss this issue later in the week on public-html once my HTML WG
> > membership is renewed.
> 
> If you'd like, I can ask the other two HTML WG co-chairs whether they agree
> that the name of the spec is a settled issue and cannot be reopened without new
> information.
> 

I'll take it up with either the other two chairs (Sam or Paul), or the group on
public-html sometime over the next seven days.
Thanks for your time.

Dean


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 2010 05:17:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:11 UTC