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

Re: [whatwg] "due consideration"

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:43:56 +0200
To: "Eduard Pascual" <herenvardo@gmail.com>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "Larry Masinter" <masinter@adobe.com>, WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uxkljit764w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:03:46 +0200, Eduard Pascual <herenvardo@gmail.com> wrote:
> <The point>
> I do not doubt of Ian's good faith, nor of his huge effort in making
> HTML5 the best possible thing it might be. However, I doubt of the
> sanity of having an individual to have the final say about any topic,
> even above expert groups that have been researched and discussed the
> topic for years.

But he does _not_ have a final say on _any_ topic. The HTML WG has. And ultimately the Director.

> Honestly, I can't say for sure which method would be best for HTML;
> but I'm still convinced that having a single gatekeeper with absolute
> power over the next web standard is, at least, insane.
> </The point>

Agreed, but that is false.

Since the WHATWG list is on the cc list, this also goes for the WHATWG. If the WHATWG members (see the WHATWG charter; full disclaimer: I'm one of them) decide that Ian is no longer making good decisions they can override him as well.

Ultimately implementors of Web browsers can also decide not to adopt the specification. Authors can do the same. There's quite a lot of checks and balances I think. Way more for instance than with the _six_-month HTML4 process.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 11:44:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:48 UTC