Re: HTML5-warnings - request to publish as next heartbeat WD

Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> Here's what I'm asserting should have happened with @summary:
>>
>> 1. Gather some data and report the @summary issue to WAI/PFWG.
>> 2. WAI/PFWG does not respond satisfactorily, for whatever reason.
>> 3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 until WAI/PFWG responds satisfactorily, OR
>> 4. Propose alternatives that could replace @summary that meet WAI/PFWG's
>>   requirements. Author preliminary language into the HTML5
>>   specification and note that the solution does not enjoy consensus
>>   and is controversial.
> 
> We have a heartbeat requirement forcing us to publish *something*
> every 3(?) months. How do you propose to satisfy that if we do 3
> above?

Note the "OR" at the end of #3. I'm proposing we do #3 (and while we're
doing #3), we do #4 as a temporary stop-gap solution until #3 is done.

What I've proposed above will not stand in the way of HTML WG meeting
it's heartbeat requirement.

> Isn't 4 what has happened? Is there a specific WAI/PFWG rule that the
> suggested rule of using <caption> violates? The part that hasn't
> happened is marking it controversial I guess, is that what you are
> referring to that keeps step 4 from being fulfilled?

Yes, it hasn't been marked as "under active discussion". I'm shying away
from using the term "controversial" because it's emotionally loaded and
is having the effect of making some people on here very defensive.

The goal is to notify the public that the state of @summary, in
particular, is under active discussion.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny) (twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Bitmunk 3.1 Released - Browser-based P2P Commerce
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/06/29/browser-based-p2p-commerce/

Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 15:25:59 UTC