- From: Shawn Medero <smedero@uw.edu>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:45:45 -0700
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Manu Sporny<msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: > I edited the HTML5-warnings draft because I believe that when the W3C > publishes a document to the public that is Controversial, it should > attempt to communicate which parts of that document are problematic. It > should be done in a way that is not overly broad, but specific to key > sections. I worry more about HTML5's success in the marketplace than I > do about RDFa's success in the marketplace. The concern I have with the HTML5-warnings draft is that it doesn't appear to have defined the term "controversial" or what issues are "controversial" using the consensus building approach that the W3C values. So while I think it is a good start towards better communication with the public it is inconsistent with the HTML WG's own issue tracker, the [section status annotations][1] found in the WHATWG's version of the spec, [see the <bb> element for one such "controversial" flag][2], and the working group as a whole. As jokingly noted on #whatwg's IRC we don't even enjoy consensus on the method of styling section status indicators in the draft. It seems like we would best served by getting our own house in order first before attempting to communicate any message to a larger audience. As background to all this, I'll note that one of the things we did at the October 2008 f2f meeting in France was go through the WHATWG edition of the spec at that time and use the section status annotation feature to at least note an informal idea of where things were. For various reasons, (mostly technical I believe) reasons the annotation tool is not currently available on the HTML WG draft. I believe we completed marking every section in the spec at that time but I don't know how many of changed since then, whether there's an accurate change history kept, etc. (many still note their last updated timestamp as October 2008 via Mike Smith who was toggling the statuses after discussion in the room.) Shawn [1]: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/interactive-elements.html#the-bb-element [2]: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/status-documentation.html
Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 15:46:25 UTC