- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 01:36:43 -0700
- To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Aug 15, 2010, at 1:27 AM, Jirka Kosek wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > >> All of these rejections -- for both the field types and the keywords >> -- have been along lines that appear to me to be highly bureaucratic >> and not at all in the best interests of the Web. It seemed at times >> that the gatekeepers (plural: two separate people responded during the >> test of the registry) are more interested in applying theoretical >> policies than actually helping people either to avoid clashes with rel >> values or to increase interoperability in this space. > > Well, I haven't time to follow all cited emails, just part of them. But > in the conversation I have read it seems completely natural from > "gatekeepers" to ask for reference to more stable and established > document in /TR space then to editor's snapshots on dev.w3.org or > whatwg.org. > > You can call it highly bureaucratic and standards work is sometimes > really bureaucratic (but this is nothing compared to ISO ;-), but proper > referencing is vital part of each standard text, including registration > form for registry. I'm curious what the process would be like for someone who is not already editing an on-topic W3C publication. What would be the recommended process for an individual or company that has invented a new rel value, but does not have the ability to edit anything on w3.org /TR space? Regards, Maciej
Received on Monday, 16 August 2010 08:37:16 UTC