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: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:18:34 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0270912100518l4bd3a2f9h9021f18a07efc87a@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:00 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>
>>> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have updated the counter-proposal located on the ESW Wiki at
>>>> http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/ChangeProposals/KeepMicrodata .
>>>
>>> "If Microdata were to be split from the HTML spec, it is possible that
>>> control of it would move to a separate working group, which would move part
>>> of HTML's development out of the hands of the working group chartered to
>>> develop HTML."
>>>
>>> How so, without the HTML WG agreeing to that?
>>
>> This was a point Shelley brought up, I believe:
>>
>>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0189.html
>>
>> Since nobody questioned it when Shelley suggested it, I presumed it was a
>> good argument and suggested to Tab that it might be worth taking her
>> suggestion into account.
>
> It would be helpful if you'd be a *bit* more concrete in what you're
> referring to (why waste other people's time looking up one sentence in a 10
> page email when you don't have to?).
>
> *Assuming* you're referring to:
>
> "Actually this really is a question of control. If pieces are split off
> from the HTML5 document, they could end up in their own working
> groups, and with their own editors. That means this group, and you,
> would have little control over the spec, if this were to happen."
>
> So yes, if something is split into a separate spec, and then the WG agrees
> to hand this spec over to somebody else, somebody else would be in control.
> By definition.
>
> On the other hand, working on microdata-like stuff *is* in our charter, so
> right now it's not clear to me why the WG *would* pass control to a
> different Working Group.
>
> BR, Julian
>


Having discussions of any form in this group is becoming impossible,
because all we're doing now is waiting on each other's words, like a
cougar waits on the next sheep coming down the mountain.

I would suggest that we all not take each other's sentences out of
context, because all we do is end up looking like petty children
indulging in playground taunts. "But he said..." "Did not!" "Did too!"
"Did not!" It's not fun, and it's embarrassing.

We have a change proposal in process, now. All sides will be heard. I
suggest we focus on specifics, and work within the change process.

My comment was not a suggestion, and that's obvious to anyone, but
yes, if split off, and if the group that supports Microdata does so
desire, it can end up under another charter, or group. Little
different than what's happening with other various parts that have
been split off from the HTML5 specification. And that doesn't mean it
won't have the same people involved.

And it might actually do better. After all, we haven't shown ourselves
to be either a model of efficiency, or intra-group cooperation.

Then again, it may not. We may want to hold on to it. Our baby, how
can we let it go?

Who knows? Maybe in the end, HTML5 will be released by a completely
separate group, too--if the W3C and the major vendors involved in this
group decide that we're embarrassing them.

The world if full of endless possibilities. Me, I'll see how the
Change Process goes this first time, and worry about the future after.

Shelley
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 13:19:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:55 UTC