Re: MSE and in-band track registries

On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> After initially recommending that In-Band registry follow the lead of MSE,
> the co-chairs discovered three problems.
>
> The first, and most easiest to solve, is that we don't have a lightweight
> process for updating dated specifications published on the web site.  This
> is the subject of an open bug on MSE[1].
>
> The second is that the registry points to W3C specifications with MUST
> requirements, and these specifications themselves have not gone through the
> IPR process.  While this was previously overlooked, now that it is known it
> will need to be cleared with the Director.
>
> Presuming that is OK with the Director, we will need to ensure that no
> reference from MSE or HTML 5.0 to the registry does so as a normative MUST.
>
> This lead us to conclude that the "microformats wiki existing-rel-values
> page" reference in HTML5 Section 4.8.4.14  "Other link types" [2] was a
> better example to follow.  This material is characterized by the following
> characteristics:
>
> a) the referenced material is on a wiki which makes it easy to update,
> b) the reference to the registry (wiki) itself is Informative,
> c) the referencing text uses the MAY term when pointing to the material in
> the registry (wiki)."

We could pull the Inband Track Sourcing spec out to a wiki page,
however, I do think the W3C document format is more readable than a
wiki page. With the right publication process behind it (through
GitHub) can be made as easily update-able as everything else.
Another alternative would be to move it into a "Living Standard" doc
like the ones in the WHATWG, since that format of document seems
adequate for the needs, which could be done through the InBand Tracks
Community Group or the WHATWG.


> This leads to the following recommendations:
>
> MSE:
> 1. Change the text in Section 12 to use MAY (or at most SHOULD) instead of
> MUST.
> 2. Keep the MSE reference to the registry as Informative rather than
> Normative.
> 3. Move the registry itself [3] and its referenced documents to wiki pages
> (thus resolving bug 25581), and update the MSE specification to point to the
> new registry wiki page.
>
> In-Band:
> 1. Ensure that all references to the registry use MAY (or at most
> SHOULD) instead of MUST.

Similar argument to the MSE registry applies here: you can't reference
a file format that you're using with a "MAY" reference.

> 2. Keep the reference as Informative.

The HTML spec is referencing the Inband Track Sourcing spec as
non-normative, so from a HTML POV it should be fine.

> 3. Move the registry itself[4] to a wiki page, and update the HTML5
> specification to point to the new page.

Same arguments that Aaron brought up apply. However, if that is the
conclusion we arrive it, it's certainly something we can do.

> We believe the In-Band changes can be done during the upcoming HTML 5.0 LC.
>
> Should the Director not be OK with the specs pointed to by the registries
> containing MUST statements, we will determine how to proceed based on the
> input the Director provides at that time.

Like Aaron, I also believe that a solution through the version control
system should be able to achieve the same goals as a solution through
a wiki.
We'll wait for the Director's input before making any changes.

Cheers,
Silvia.

>
> - Sam Ruby,
> on behalf of the HTML WG co-chairs
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25581
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/links.html#concept-rel-extensions
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2013/12/byte-stream-format-registry/
> [4]
> http://rawgit.com/silviapfeiffer/HTMLSourcingInbandTracks/master/index.html
>

Received on Saturday, 7 June 2014 03:44:32 UTC