- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:45:45 +0100
- To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:21:22 +0100, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > In order to gather data on the veracity of statements about 'what web > devlopers want' I have emailed the web standards group posing the > question > > "As a web developer do you find the 'HTML5 the mark up language' a > useful document?" > > wsg mailing list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg@webstandardsgroup.org/maillist.html > > and have asked for feedback on twitter: > > Is HTML5 mark up spec http://shrinkster.com/13zy useful compared to > the fullblown spec http://shrinkster.com/13zz use #html5ml in reply It seems to me that is not a question of whether the specification is useful to some people; I'm sure it is. Rather, the question is why this specification needs to be normative given that it contains the same information as the HTML 5 specification already does. The proponents for publishing this specification do not seem really upfront about that, which gives the feeling that there is a hidden agenda. If the goal is just to have wider review on whether this is a good idea saying it is non-normative should be fine. (E.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/ has got plenty of (mostly positive, afaict) review from Web developers even though it is a non-normative document.) If we later decide that splitting the specification up along this axis is a good idea and the WG agrees that Mike's draft can be used as a basis for the markup language parts we can always change it to being normative then. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 11:46:28 UTC