Re: XForms Use Case

Would someone on the HTML5 working group summarize where Issue 41 currently
stands? I spent some time trying to follow the threads there, but it wasn't
obvious what the final resolution was.

Kurt Cagle
XML Architect
*Lockheed / US National Archives ERA Project*

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Michael Champion <> wrote:

> Issue 41 is on HTML5. I agree that reopening the discussion when the WG is
> trying to nail down its Last Call spec is in appropriate.  But that doesn't
> mean the TF can't  discuss the possibility of revisiting the issue in a
> future version of HTML, especially if we uncover a novel but effective way
> to increase extensibility without breaking existing web sites and
> applications or unreasonably burdening implementers.
> For that matter, this TF could in principle make a last call comment on
> HTML5 if we discover a relatively small tweak to the spec that would
> increase its interoperability with the XML world.  So, I don't think the use
> case of XML content that partially conflicts with the local names defined in
> HTML (which I think is the generic version of the XForms use case) is out of
> scope for the task force.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:
>] On Behalf Of Edward O'Connor
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:34 AM
> To: Michael Kay
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: XForms Use Case
> Michael wrote:
> > I'm afraid I've no idea what Issue 41 is
> It's the HTML WG issue regarding distributed extensibility. [1] It's also
> the first Google search result for "ISSUE-41".
> > though I dare say we're unlikely to discuss anything that hasn't been
> > discussed before.
> Yes. As Henri said, it would be bad process for this TF to waste cycles on
> DE before the HTML WG chairs have determined the outcome of ISSUE-41.
> Ted
> 1.

Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 18:59:47 UTC