- From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:56:26 -0500
- To: public-html@w3.org
This article by Kurt Cagle[1] reminded that the discussion on this issue/action item seems to have died out. I realize that without the author of the Microsoft proposal being available, it's difficult to continue the discussion, but I would really be concerned if it just seems to fade away. I'm only an interested bystander, but there seemed to be three different issues involved with the Microsoft extensibility proposal [2]: 1. First there's the proposal itself, and seemingly concern about Microsoft's implementation. Seemingly, we're waiting on responses from Microsoft folks in this regard. Perhaps someone from Microsoft could provide a timeline when answers can be expected. 2. Second, there seems to be confusion about whether the Microsoft proposal is a proposal[3]. I really wish that substantive discussions would not continue to be reduced to technical requirements, or points of order, but I imagine when there are so many issues and concerns, you have to grab hold of what you can to attempt to bring about order. It would be nice if we could determine if the Microsoft proposal is a proposal, and move from this to specifics. 3. Lastly, there seems to be doubt about whether decentralized extensibility is even necessary[4], regardless of proposal. If this is true, should the WG resolve this, as an issue, first, and then work on solutions once the group works past this basic assumption? I realize the group is busy and there's an extensive list of issues and items to work through, but I'm quite concerned when I see a discussion begin on something that seems to me to be exceedingly important, only to fade away without action or direction. Shelley [1] http://www.xmltoday.org/content/coming-html-5-train-wreck [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Sep/1216.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0144.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0180.html
Received on Tuesday, 13 October 2009 14:57:03 UTC