- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:12:13 -0600
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Justin Thorp <juth@loc.gov>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 01:43 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Justin Thorp wrote: [...] > > http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/Guide/HTML5Process I don't see anything there that isn't in the schedule on the WG homepage, so I replaced the content with a link to http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#sched I'm happy to take advice about our schedule, but the WG can't unilaterally make it substantially longer; we have to ask the W3C management and membership if it's OK to consume more staff resources, take longer to get to market, etc. > Note that the HTML5 process started back in 2004. Also, I'm not sure the > dates on that timetable are really realistic (last call 6 months from now, > when it's taken us more than 9 months to publish a FPWD, and we haven't > even managed that yet?). Yes, the LC milestone needs updating. I'm mulling it over; advice is welcome. > Different people have different expectations of > what dates certain things are expected by, so it may be helpful to use a > less passive voice when giving expected dates. Quite. > I've updated the FAQ on this: > > http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#When_will_HTML_5_be_finished.3F I see "It is estimated that HTML5 will reach a W3C recommendation in the year 2022 or later". While it's subject to change, the plan of record is: 2010-09 HTML5 Recommendation http://www.w3.org/html/wg/#sched http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#deliverables Please include that estimate instead of or in addition to any other estimates when you're describing this project to wide audiences. > Also, I think it would help to emphasise how different parts of the spec > have different levels of maturity (e.g. how <canvas> is widely implemented > and shipping, whereas <datagrid> is just a draft). I have repeatedly found that attempts to mix maturity levels in one document are not cost-effective; the best way to explain to people that <datagrid> has a different status from <canvas> is to put it in a different document. I hope you'll give the idea serious consideration. > What people really care > about is when they can use the features, not when the spec will be "done". I also hope we publish test materials and implementation evaluation reports soon... reports that make the maturity of various features (and combinations of features...) apparent to wide audiences. I haven't heard much since the "story telling and test cases" session in Cambridge, but I still think it's a promising approach. http://www.w3.org/2007/11/09-html-wg-minutes.html#item01 -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 04:12:22 UTC