[Bug 9001] Consistent "Status" sections for Microdata and RDFa

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9001


Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |msporny@digitalbazaar.com




--- Comment #7 from Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>  2010-02-18 05:09:10 ---
Sam has asked me to comment on this bug.

We're in a catch-22 here:

First, Larry and Julian wanted the SotD sections to reflect the issues
concerning Microdata, HTML+RDFa and Canvas 2D. It was a reasonable request, so
I made it. Then I found out that the SotD sections are off-limits to editors.

Maciej had logged a number of bugs related to the HTML+RDFa draft. It was both
more transparent to the reader, and easier for me to understand the state of
the draft by inserting those bugs in line with each section. Also, in the name
of compromise, I added Larry and Julian's issues to the bug list so they would
be interested in the document to notify the W3C team to keep the bugs in mind
when re-writing the SotD section.

The only issue that relates to HTML+RDFa is ISSUE-41, and it doesn't really
apply to any particular section, but the concept that HTML+RDFa may one day be
specified in a different way in order to be integrated with HTML5. I put a
temporary placeholder bug to point to ISSUE-41 while some of the source code
was figured out for integrating issues into the HTML+RDFa draft.

Now I'm being asked to remove all of the bugs from the status sections in the
HTML+RDFa draft and make the SotD section match the HTML5 draft. This makes the
current status of the HTML+RDFa draft much more difficult to grok for
reviewers... it is less transparent as a result. In addition, we're completely
ignoring Julian and Larry's input for the SotD section in the current draft,
which may result in objections to publish the draft.

That said, I'll do what the chairs are asking (even though I think it harms the
readability and transparency of the specification):

1. Revert the SotD section to what was there over a month ago.
2. Remove all bugs reported in the status sections of the HTML+RDFa spec.
3. Modify the wording of one of the bugs and insert ISSUE-41 as a blocking item
for HTML+RDFa LC.


-- 
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 Thursday, 18 February 2010 05:09:12 UTC