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

Re: Change Proposals and FPWD Resolutions

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:09:07 -0500
Message-ID: <4B1FCBA3.6000005@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-html@w3.org
Shelley Powers wrote:
> I agree that combing two separate actions into one change proposal is
> a mistake. I'm disappointed that the action of removing Microdata from
> the HTML5 spec have now been tied into automatically publishing
> Microdata as FPWD. 

What do you think about an additional straw poll option for those that
agree with the split, but disagree with publishing HTML+Microdata as FPWD?

> I'm keeping in mind, though, that just because a
> document is published as FPWD doesn't mean it progresses. If no one
> steps forward to support the draft, it will eventually end up as a
> note.

So, here the basic premises that led to the inclusion of automatically
publishing HTML+Microdata as FPWD:

- A non-trivial amount of work and discussion has been expended on
  developing Microdata.
- There are at least 3 supporters of Microdata as well as spec text that
  is stabilizing.
- The Microdata spec meets all FPWD requirements.
- A number of individuals don't like RDFa (for a variety of reasons) and
  want a workable alternative.

There are several outcomes that may occur if Microdata is split from HTML5.

1. The spec is dropped entirely because it is not a problem nor a
   solution that the editor nor the community wants to continue to
2. The spec continues to be worked on, and thus will inevitably be
   published as a FPWD.

I think #1 is unlikely, or rather, it would be very strange if Microdata
ceased to be worked on just because it was split from the HTML5
specification. I think #2 is more likely, and in order for the work to
continue, the publishing of the HTML+Microdata FPWD is inevitable.

> I hope, though,  that we don't get into the habit of littering this
> group's steps with the bodies of numerous FPWD that end up becoming
> notes. Our task should be to remove confusion, not add to it. To
> simplify, not clutter.

I agree. Keep in mind that we're only talking about Microdata, not a
general habit of automatically publishing FPWDs whenever something is
split from the HTML5 spec - that would, IMHO, be a very bad habit to
pick up. The reason automatic FPWD is being considered is due to the
specific circumstances surrounding HTML+Microdata and not because this
should be a general rule.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Bitmunk 3.2 Launched - The Legal P2P Music Network
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 16:09:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:04 UTC