- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:25:35 -0500
- To: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
We now have some movement on spec review and issue tracking with http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/IssueTableHeaders , for example. The in-progress results of the "What should we publish first?" survey http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd7/results suggest that design principles are just as urgent/important as the spec. More on those separately... I'm interested in something of a review schedule for the HTML 5 spec itself. I'd like at least two people to do thorough reviews of each section of the spec, and send their comments for discussion in the WG, with the goal of summaries like IssueTableHeaders for important issues. In order to get a sense of timing, I'd like specific people to volunteer for specific sections and give a date by which you think you can deliver detailed review comments. Please use the tasks survey. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/tasks83/ As a reminder, the following people indicated interest in this task to date: detailed review of substantial sections of spec 1. Jonas Sicking 2. Murray Maloney 3. Ryan King 4. Debi Orton 5. Simon Pieters 6. Anne van Kesteren 7. Henri Sivonen 8. Asbjørn Ulsberg 9. Geoffrey Sneddon 10. David Håsäther 11. Sander van Lambalgen 12. Laurens Holst 13. John-Mark Bell 14. Darren West 15. Maciej Stachowiak 16. Andrew Neitsch 17. Ian Hickson 18. Mikko Honkala 19. Thomas Higginbotham 20. David Hyatt 21. Serdar Kiliç 22. Isac Lagerblad 23. Patrick Taylor 24. Roman Kitainik 25. Matthew Wilcox 26. Craig Saila 27. Karl Dubost 28. Jens Meiert 29. Shawn Medero 30. Thomas Bradley -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 16:25:22 UTC