- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:03:19 +0100
- To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- CC: "public-html-wg-announce@w3.org" <public-html-wg-announce@w3.org>
On 16.03.2010 23:51, Paul Cotton wrote: > > > At next week’s W3C Advisory Committee meeting [1] there is a session > where the HTML WG co-chairs will report to the W3C membership on the > Working Group’s status and progress. Our presentation will be based on > our HTML WG status report [2] . > > Please send any feedback or questions directly to the co-chairs or to > public-html@w3.org <mailto:public-html@w3.org>. > ... Two things come to mind: 1) "The Director supported this ruling in an email to the HTML WG." That message contained the hint: "It is important (a) that the design be modular; (b) that the specifications be kept modular and (c) that the communities of expertise of the respective fields (graphics and data) be involved in the design process." -- <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0871.html> I think it would be great if we tried to get the RDF(a) community, the Microdata community, the Micro*formats* community, and other parties such as Dublin Core to collaborate. So far it seems we took Tim's email and forgot about what he reminded us to do. 2) "Liaisons" I think this should mention <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/56>, and the relation to the IETF IRI Working Group. Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2010 23:04:03 UTC