Re: Ultimate gatekeeper for document-conformance decisions [was: Why I don't attend the weekly teleconference]

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Michael(tm) Smith<mike@w3.org> wrote:
> Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, 2009-06-24 00:20 +0000:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
>> I'm not gatekeeper. I'm just another editor. The chairs are the ones with
>> the authority to declare consensus, which decides what gets published. I
>> certainly have no power to reject another draft.
>>
>> (The browser vendors are the ultimate gatekeepers, of course, in that they
>> get to decide what actually gets implemented. It's our role as editors to
>> make sure we do what they want, otherwise our documents are nothing but
>> rather dry science fiction.)
>
> Browser vendors may collectively be the de facto ultimate
> gatekeepers as far as implementation decisions about features of
> the language that require rendering in browsers, or some other
> kind of associated behavior in browsers -- but they're certainly
> not the ultimate gatekeepers as far as decisions about document
> conformance.
>
> In particular, they're not gatekeepers at all as far as deciding
> whether certain existing or proposed elements or attributes that
> don't have any associated behavior in browsers should be part of
> the language or not -- or whether they should be optional or
> required, or how their semantics and contents/values are defined.
>
> This working group is the direct owner for those kinds of decisions.

That's a good clarification. Thanks.

Shelley

>
> And as far as publication of any W3C standard related to those, if
> there's any ultimate gatekeeper, it's the W3C Director.
>
>  --Mike
>
> --
> Michael(tm) Smith
> http://people.w3.org/mike/
>

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 03:32:39 UTC