- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:05:00 -0400
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote: > > It's the unevenness in the ability to directly contribute to the > specification that is the "walled garden" that I take issue with: > > """ > Throughout history, the ability to openly contribute ideas, scrutinize > them, and form consensus around those ideas has been shown to produce > the most desirable outcomes. HTML5 is currently a walled garden that > must be opened to the greater standards community in order to ensure a > stable framework for the future of the Web. > """ > > So, addressing those point-by-point related to how the WHAT WG operates: > > contribute ideas: great! > scrutinize them: wonderful! > form consensus: fail (but that's what the W3C is for, right?) > produce: fail (unless we don't want to scale the community) > > Ian is really the only one that is actively allowed to produce anything > of significance in WHAT WG. In general, if he doesn't agree with you, it > doesn't go in. > > To put an HTML5+RDFa proposal together, I had to go outside of this > community. There are plenty of places that you can have the above discussion - I request that public-html not be one of them. If you can find a way to work with the WHATWG, great. If you can't don't let that stop you. Or at least, if you do chose to let that stop you, please don't have that discussion here. Thanks. - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 00:05:49 UTC