W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-wg-announce@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: W3C HTML Working Group Status Report (November, 2009 - March, 2010)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:03:19 +0100
Message-ID: <4BA00E37.1050408@gmx.de>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:08:40 UTC