Re: Moratorium on the spec-splitting discussion

Philip TAYLOR wrote:
> 
> Jonas Sicking wrote:
> 
>> What is the purpose of not having the discussion here? I'm not really 
>> very exited to join the www-archive list in order follow discussions 
>> regarding the HTML5 spec(s).
> 
> I agree completely with Jonas : a discussion as important as
> to whether the WG should publish a monolith or a series of
> discrete documents should be conducted within the WG on the
> WG's own list, not on a list unrelated to the WG's business.

I can request a new list that is specific to this Working Group's 
business if that is what people prefer...

The current spec is a deck of cards, arranged in a particular order, 
first the Aces, then the deuces, all the way up to the Kings.

There are people on this list who would like to do the work of arranging 
the cards into four piles: a stack of hearts, a stack of spades, etc. 
At this point, the analogy breaks down, because there are many who feel 
that such an arrangement is not feasible, but lets ignore that for a 
moment.  I must confess that I'm skeptical myself.

Meanwhile, there are people who want to discuss whether or not certain 
people should be allowed to touch the cards.

And then there are people who want to complain about elephants.

I would like to reserve *this* list to discussions about actual specs. 
And about concrete proposals to improve such.  It doesn't mean that 
other discussions can't happen, but I would very much like to increase 
the signal to noise ratio in *this* mailing list for those people who 
endeavor to do the business of this working group: writing specs.

And if I can't succeed at diverting the meta and meta-meta discussion 
elsewhere; I will simply do the reverse: request a list specifically for 
discussing concrete proposals for improving the spec.  An express lane, 
as it were.

> Philip TAYLOR

- Sam Ruby

Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 11:27:58 UTC