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

Re: ACTION-78: Suggestion text for 1.5.4

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 01:12:02 +0000 (UTC)
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0901200100130.29785@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Sam Ruby wrote:
> >
> > I think the points Henri made in this e-mail regarding the "can live 
> > with" design model are very apt:
> >
> >    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jan/0158.html
> >
> > I have experienced first-hand the "race to the bottom" effect of this 
> > kind of compromise-by-committee design in other working groups. I 
> > think the "what's the best possible answer" method is more effective 
> > than "is there anyone who can't live with this".
> And I think that there are very real problems with having a despot 
> model, benevolent or otherwise.

There are options other than those two, for example, the process that our 
charter describes, or asking whether anyone can find a better solution, or 
asking for reasoning and objective research to back up each proposal and 
picking the option that has the most compelling arguments.

I'm not arguing for any particular model here, merely agreeing with Henri 
about the risks posed by the "can live with" design model and other 
compromise-by-committee design models.

> Larry's email vividly illustrates how such an approach significantly 
> damages the overall credibility of the overall effort.

I don't follow. Can you elaborate?

> > (This is a non-technical issue, though; if the HTMLWG has a strong 
> > desire to remove this section, I can certainly remove it from the 
> > HTMLWG draft.)
> That would be acceptable to me.

Given the recent comments regarding possible improvements to the text, I 
would like to see if improvements to the text would be possible before 
just removing the text. Is that acceptable also? My current timetable has 
me looking at writing and updating the introduction sections in early Q3.

> Which reminds me, are there plans for refreshing the HTMLWG draft, along 
> with an associated publication note?

The HTML5 spec draft is ready as far as I am aware. I do not know why it 
hasn't been published recently.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 20 January 2009 01:19:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:41 UTC