- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:05:32 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > > So an attempt to do a split should have the backing of the WG before a > significant amount of time is spent. The working group, as I understand it, backs the splitting out of sections from HTML5. In particular, I have not heard any objections to splitting out items 1-9 of the following list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Oct/0127.html The only thing preventing this from happening is a lack of volunteers. > The proposal I criticized was not to have a WG decision until a huge > amount of time was already spent by the volunteer. Do you believe that the working group should continue to support an editor after that editor has shown a lack of ability to write a high quality specification? I certainly would hope that if I started writing complete gibberish in the HTML5 spec, that the working group would oust me. Indeed, I am relying on the fact that the working group has _not_ expelled me as evidence of continued overall support for my work. If I'm doing a bad job, or if any editor is doing a bad job, then the working group had better retract their support, or the Web as a whole will suffer. Do you disagree? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2008 08:06:12 UTC