Re: clarification on Adobe Blocking

On Feb 12, 2010, at 6:09 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:

> At least two members of this team, Ian Hickson[1] and Anne van  
> Kesteren[2], representing Google and Opera, respectively, have been  
> writing this morning that Adobe is officially blocking publication  
> of HTML5. This type of communication could cause FUD among the  
> community of users, and should be addressed as soon as possible.
> There was something in the minutes yesterday about a formal  
> objection from Larry Masinter [3], but the emails in this regard  
> went to a protected email list. However, Larry has discussed in the  
> www-archive list[4], a publicly accessible list, his objections to  
> the publication of Microdata, the RDFa document, and the Canvas 2D  
> API, but not the HTML5 document, itself. And the concerns I've read  
> in this list have to do with charter and scope -- a reasonable  
> concern, I feel. Others of us have also expressed a similar concern.
> An unfortunate consequence of lumping multiple documents into one  
> CfC is that there is some confusion about when an action or  
> objection is made against one, it seems to be against all. Yet, and  
> co-chairs, correct me if I'm wrong, but we can object to any one of  
> the documents, and it won't hold up up the publications of the  
> others. The lump CfC was a procedural short cut, not an actual  
> formal grouping.
> As far as we know of, there is no Formal Objection blocking the  
> publication of HTML5...correct?

So far as I am aware, any objections that have been made were in  
Member-only space and via private contact to the W3C Team. Those with  
Member access can see some of the relevant email here:

Since w3c-archive is Member-confidential, I'm not sure if I can convey  
any more information than that on a public list. It is up to the  
persons involved to decide whether to post any information publicly.

As for Larry's charter scope inquiry on www-archive, this message  
presents the conclusion of the HTML WG Chairs and Team Contacts on  
discussing it:


Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 15:03:48 UTC