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

Re: [whatwg] A New Way Forward for HTML5 (revised)

From: Peter Kasting <pkasting@google.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:30:08 -0700
Message-ID: <d62cf1d10907261930w1e3a2431nfb56aab1c9a9eb22@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>wrote:

> I'm not proposing that we allow people to directly stomp all over Ian's
> specification - that wouldn't help anything. I am also not suggesting
> that Ian should change how he authors his HTML5 specification.
>
> What I'm proposing is that others should be able to easily create
> lasting alternate language, modified sections, remove sections or add
> sections IN THEIR OWN SANDBOX and generate alternate specifications
> based on Ian's HTML5 specification. We should provide the tools to
> enable that.
>

OK, this clarifies some of my confusion in my last response.

I do not understand what advantages this would provide over the current
system.  Here are some use cases:

* If one simply wants an easy way to comment, one can now use the new
comment-in-the-spec-itself tool Ian has added.
* If one wants to share a more detailed proposal for discussion, one can
post it on this email list.
* If one wants to broaden discussion beyond this list or post long, detailed
proposals, one can put up the proposal on the web and link to it (here and
elsewhere).
* If one wants the proposal to mirror the language of the spec, one can copy
and paste language from the spec to edit.

What use case outside these are you seeking to aid?  What would the tool do
that copy-and-paste will not do?  How is (whatever it is that tool does)
critical to the use case, such that it cannot be well-solved now?

So far you have not given a use case (that I've seen) so much as a vague
assertion that because the number of spec contributors is in the hundreds
rather than tens of thousands, there is some not-well-defined barrier to
entry in the above list.

PK
Received on Monday, 27 July 2009 02:30:51 UTC

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