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

On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Mike Schinkel wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification. I do hear you and think you have valid 
> points, but doesn't it seem to you that having two parallel groups 
> discussing the same issues where not everyone is involved in all 
> discussions somewhat troubling?

Like I said, the ideal situation would be for the two groups to work 
together, as far as I am concerned. I don't really know what it would mean 
for everyone to be involved in all discussions -- 700 to 900 people 
discussing every topic seems unmanageable. (There are 250 HTMLWG members 
and 720 WHATWG members).

In practice in the WHATWG I edit the documents taking into account 
everyone's feedback; there's not really any need for discussion to happen 
in a single place. In fact, in addition to the WHATWG mailing list, I also 
take into account feedback I see from people who aren't in the group, e.g. 
at conferences, on blogs, in forums, based on the research I've done at 
Google and on other people's research, based on direct feedback from 
browser vendors, based on comments in bug reports, etc.

> Wouldn't not be possible to merge the two activities, at least until the 
> W3C proves that it won't make progress (hopefully not, but that is your 
> concern, right?)

I've encouraged everyone on the WHATWG list to join the HTMLWG list, 
which I believe is the only way to "merge" the two groups, given the 
HTMLWG's patent policy requirements. I'm not sure what can be done beyond 
that at this point.

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

Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 08:03:06 UTC