The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet)

On Sun, 1 Apr 2007, Mike Schinkel wrote:
> Murray Maloney wrote:
> >
> > I don't understand this exchange. Picking only one list would limit 
> > your audience. Since some of us are working exclusively in the HTML 
> > WG, I dont see how it helps to advise anyone to simply pick one list. 
> > My impression is that the W3C's HTML WG is working on the next W3C 
> > HTML. That is the spec that I want to work on.
>
> I concur with Murray here. When I asked Dan Connolly about this he said 
> it had already been addressed by Ian on a list where Ian said WHATWG 
> will continue even though it might be a superset.  But I find that whole 
> organization confusing much like the old Chinese proverb "Man with one 
> watch knows the time. Man with two watches is never sure."

Just to clarify what I said:

The HTML working group is where I believe HTML development should happen. 
However, HTML development has been happening for a while in the WHATWG, 
with some level of success and browser vendor involvement. It is not 
currently clear what the HTML workin group is going to produce, in terms 
of specifications. Therefore, as a safety net, if you will, the WHATWG 
specs will continue to be developed for the time being.

I, as a member of this group and the editor of the WHATWG specs, will do 
my utmost to ensure that the WHATWG specs do not contradict the HTML 
working group work in any way. It is possible, however, that specification 
development in the WHATWG will progress faster than in the HTML working 
group; if this happens, the two specs will not be exactly synchronised. 
Even if this happens, I will still ensure that the WHATWG specs do not 
contradict the HTML working group specs; if the two groups do develop at 
different speeds, then the WHATWG specs would become a superset of the 
HTML working group specs (since they would be further advanced in 
development but otherwise be completely compatible).

The ideal outcome, in my personal opinion, would be for the two groups to 
work on the same specification, so that the two specifications remain 
exactly synchronised, word for word. If this is the will of this working 
group, I would be happy to volunteer as editor for the two specs, which 
would be the easiest and quickest way to ensure they stay identical.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 06:04:46 UTC