Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5

On Apr 10, 2007, at 8:12 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:

> Hi-
> I think that starting with the work done by WHATWG is sensible.   
> Not only is it a considerable body of important work, but it has  
> the backing of representatives from 3 of the major browser vendors.
> I'm curious what would happen if this proposal is not accepted.  Is  
> this an ultimatum on behalf of Mozilla, Apple, and Opera?  Do these  
> representative speak with the voices of their respective companies,  
> or are these individual opinions?

It is a proposal, not an ultimatum.

> With the WHATWG specs as a starting point, though, I think that  
> everything should be up for discussion.  There has been a very  
> strongly stated attitude that previous work should be  
> rubberstamped, which would exclude everyone who did not take part  
> in the WHATWG work.  Just as there are apparently some who do not  
> wish to work with the W3C, there are many who did not want to work  
> with WHATWG (including, because of patent policy, the dominant  
> browser in the market).

I quote from the proposal: "If HTML5 is adopted as a starting point,  
the contents of the document would still be up for review and  
revision". It even suggests a possible procedure for doing that.

> Similarly, Ian Hickson has made public statements that he believes  
> the editor should have absolute control over the specification,  
> rather than operating on consensus.  Would he still be willing to  
> assume this role without this absolute power?

Ian should speak for himself. I think you are misinterpreting his  
remarks though. As I understand it, his preference is for the editor  
to be able to make the initial call on most issues based on the  
group's discussion rather than raising most spec issues for a vote. I  
think he would agree that the group should have the ability to  
overrule him if he makes a bad decision and there is sufficient  
objection to it.


Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 17:25:46 UTC