- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:57:31 -0800
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: David Singer <singer@apple.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:07 AM, Larry Masinter wrote: > >> We seem to have the following choices: >> A) Publish the HTML5 document and forget the Markup Language document >> B) Publish the HTML5 document as normative, and the Markup language >> as informative >> C) Publish the HTML5 document as normative on semantics and >> informative on syntax, and markup the other way >> D) Publish them both as normative > > Publish the Markup Language document as FPWD, and continue to evolve > it in a way that leaves all 5 courses of action open. > > ven if the result is (A), it will help understand the organization > of the single document by pointing out dependencies that would > otherwise be hard to see. > > Personally, I believe (D) would be best if it is possible to do so > without conflicts; whether that's possible is yet to be seen, and > can be evaluated as we go along. It seems to me your recommendation amounts to proceeding along course (D), leaving the possibility of changing course. I do not see how this option leaves things more open than (B) or (C); or even (A) if we interpret "forget" as "don't publish for now but continue to evolve and discuss". Do you have an argument for why temporarily proceeding with option (D) is the best way to keep our options open, and not just a way to bias the final outcome to your preferred outcome? I am willing to hear out such arguments and I'm open to changing my mind on the best way to proceed. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 23:58:12 UTC