W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: ISSUE-76: Need feedback on splitting Microdata into separate specification

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 11:38:47 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912070938w6f48c28fm12b067433b99eb47@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Cc: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote:
>> Why is it not conceivably reusable outside of HTML?
>
> Well, okay, let me back down a bit on that.  It's conceivably reusable
> outside of HTML, yes.  But no more or less than, say, <video>.  It's
> plausible that other specifications would want to include videos.  For
> instance, SVG currently allows embedding bitmap images, and it might
> make sense for it to allow embedding videos too.  The same goes for
> many other parts of HTML, even <img>.
>
> But we shouldn't split up the specification because some other spec
> might theoretically want to use some part of it separately.  That will
> lead to splitting up the spec into a huge number of pieces, probably
> at the wrong places.  It will also waste effort in the cases where no
> other spec actually ends up using part of it separately.  XHTML 1.1
> and CSS 3 both tried a modular design, and as far as I know, few to
> none of their modules are actually used by other specs independent of
> the others.  If authors of non-HTML specs actually *ask* for something
> to be split to a separate modular spec so they can reference it,
> that's when we should split something to a separate spec for the sake
> of modularity.
>
>

The bug process/change proposal opens the door for asking any number
of splits. To my understanding, each will be considered, and if the
rationale is strong enough, potentially be implemented. I imagine
reusing a part of the current HTML5 spec by another spec could be a
good rationale, but probably not sufficient.

Frankly, with the amount of work to do a bug request/tracker
issue/change proposal, I don't think we're going to see "huge" numbers
of splits. The amount of work does make it that you have to _really_
want something before you even start.

Shelley
Received on Monday, 7 December 2009 17:39:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:54 UTC