- 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