- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:53:52 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Daniel Glazman wrote: > On 15/03/2007 19:38, Luka Kladaric wrote: > > > is it really that much of a problem to checkout a copy of *some* > > revision of the whatwg material, discuss that and then quickly run > > through new developments once primary discussion is over? > > YES, it is. We're not speaking of a 5 pages spec here. We're not > speaking features so simple that a requested change on rev2 can always > be merged with current rev4. This hasn't stopped the WHATWG so far, we've been getting tons of feedback for literally years without freezing development. It hasn't been a problem. I have to agree with the other commentors in that I don't really understand why the WHATWG work needs to freeze for this group to review it. That's not to say that the WHATWG would ignore the HTML WG, anything that could be done to help would be done, of course. But asking another WG to just stop work is not really reasonable. (Consider, do any W3C WGs ever ask other W3C WGs to stop work so they can comment on a draft?) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2007 19:54:12 UTC