- From: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:43:34 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
In response to the below email. I've read your comments such as: "" If the HTML WG and the WHATWG don't publish the same specification, then I, on behalf of the WHATWG, will ensure that the two specifications remain consistent and compatible, by ensuring that the WHATWG specification is always a strict superset or more detailed version of the HTML WG spec. "" My question is where you stand if the HTML WG goes a different route on an issue. Those emails state that the WHATWG, and you, will ensure the two specs are synchronized and that the WHATWG spec is, at most, a superset, but not the means by which you intend to reach this goal. Are you going to pressure the HTML WG to follow the WHATWG's design and decisions ensuring its a subset, or are you going to change the WHATWG's spec so it remains a superset? Thank you, - Elliott On Apr 10, 2007, at 6:24 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > [...] > >>> - that Ian Hickson is named as editor for the W3C's HTML 5 >>> specification, to preserve continuity with the existing WHATWG >>> effort >> >> This seems okay. I do have one concern regarding his comments that >> the >> WHATWG will continue development of their spec separately. > > Please let me know if the e-mail above and the following two e- > mails don't > address your conerns: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0025.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/ > 0052.html > > If these e-mails don't address your concerns, please let me know > what it > is exactly that they don't cover, so that I can answer them > directly -- my > impression is that I covered your points in those three earlier e- > mails.
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 22:43:47 UTC