- From: Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:32:08 -0700
- To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: "Manu Sporny" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "RDFa mailing list" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
> I don't think any of the three HTML5 specs are "finished." ... "finished". of better yet, avoid and used something like: ..."finished" works. But I agree. The only thing I am concerned with is that there are three. The other two should be shown directly as diffs from Ian's current ED. > I believe that all three should be published for the heartbeat > requirement. For this to even be feasible we must have 100% assurance that we can tell the difference of one from another. Ian is constantly responding to and filtering reported bugs and edit requests that get somewhat documented on this list and results in updating the official draft. In addition, other proposals just as important are submited (see proposed update to embedded content RE: HTML WG Issue tracker ACTION-131 Draft ALT spec). I think it is great that several people can push the buttons to produce a new 'complete' draft independent of the single official ED at any moment but I would hope for only one complete 'official' public draft under review that is accompanied by candidate keystrokes, layouts, and editing instructions addressed to the WG for review and approval. To me, it seems like the best experiment would be to pop the uf out to freestand alongside freestand rdfn. Then if it became desirable, the final content could be dropped back in. Not a minor editing process, but probably doable. Thanks and Best Regards, Joe
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 17:33:06 UTC