W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > May 2011

[Bug 11828] Drop hgroup completely until more research has been conducted

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 21:44:52 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QHNOm-00019Z-G4@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11828

--- Comment #11 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2011-05-03 21:44:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > "clearly not really liked" and "I really want it removed" do not seem like
> > viable reasons to drop it in my eyes.
> 
> Well, actually hgroup should not be added at first. So removing it just fixes
> the situation of adding new element without proper use-cases.

Then the time to have asked that hgroup be removed was in May, of 2009, when it
was added, along with header. 

And where is the supposed functionality to replace this item? Last I heard,
people didn't want hgroup but they wanted option b or c or some other thing. 

There needs to be stability in the group, not this reeling from arbitrary
decision to arbitrary decision, with an occasional useful, or not, yank by the
co-chairs just to remind everyone that, goodness, there are a lot of people
dependent on a specification that's based on _some_ level of
thoughtfulness--not whatever playful whimsy happens to strike group/editor from
time to time.

So I won't mention the four HTML5 books I've tech edited, each of which has
covered hgroup. And how, based on one arbitrary little decision and seeming
indifference from the co-chairs, they're all out of date before they even hit
the street.

And no, I don't want to hear about, "Oh, anything goes until Last Call (or CR)
or whatever"...

When you've had an element in the spec as long as hgroup has been in the spec
(two years, this month), people have developed an expectation that it has
passed through whatever gauntlet it needed to pass through, and they can safely
presume that they can cover it in their books. 

I pushed back on elements in the spec that were added arbitrarily and without
discussion and sound vetting, but I did so well over a year ago. Or more. Back
before authors (web page and book) and designers and everyone else had become
used to the idea of the elements. 

If the group had a discussion and determined that another option was better,
and the group reached consensus on the other option, no one would fault the
decision. OK, these things happen.

But because the of an act of capriciousness?

-- 
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, 3 May 2011 21:45:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:09 UTC