- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 11:07:33 -0600
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 17:21 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Nov 21, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Dan Connolly wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Gregory, for scribing... > > > > Topics > > 1. Convene HTML WG meeting of 2007-11-16T17:00:00Z > > 3. ISSUE-19 html5-spec HTML 5 specification release(s) > > full text: http://www.w3.org/2007/11/16-html-wg-minutes > > > The minutes say this: > > <DanC> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/19 > DanC: had conversation with PTaylor about formal objection - action done > ... completed action to email negative and non-responders - done > Chairs have said the question does not carry -- WG will keep working > on spec > <DanC> DanC found out non-responders are not ok to publish > > I'd like to ask for some clarifications. > > 1) Which non-responders are not ok to publish? What are their specific > objections and how can they be addressed? I encouraged the non-responders to give this information in public, but unless and until they choose to do so, I'm not at liberty to say. The specific question I was investigating in ACTION-17 was: are the W3C members whose patents might be impacted by an HTML 5 publication sufficiently aware of the impact of this decision that we should proceed over an outstanding formal objection? After contacting several relevant W3C member organizations, I came to the conclusion that no, we do not have a critical mass of support. So Chris Wilson and I decided the question does not carry. > 2) Does this decision apply to the diffs document as well (which was a > separate question in the survey)? Yes; the proposal to publish the diffs document was contingent on publishing the spec. "Shall we release HTML 5 differences from HTML 4 along with the HTML 5 specification as a W3C Working Draft?" -- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd11spec/results > Also, I'd appreciate it if the chairs could clearly state the decision > and the reasoning behind it on public-html for discussion, since not > everyone may have spotted it in the minutes. I hope this message suffices. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2007 17:07:44 UTC