- From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:09:54 -0800
- To: plh@w3.org
- Cc: rubys@intertwingly.net, shelley.just@gmail.com, public-html@w3.org
s/microsoft/microdata/? otherwise this looks like even more fodder for media gossip. Philippe Le Hegaret writes: > On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 10:03 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote: > > > As far as we know of, there is no Formal Objection blocking the > > > publication of HTML5...correct? > > Correct. The current objection does not impact the HTML5 specification. > It does however impact the other documents: RDFa, Microsoft, and Context > 2D API. > > > I can only say that my understanding is incomplete. I was not copied on > > the Formal Objection, and while Paul requested that Larry post the > > substance of his objection on public-html yesterday, and Larry indicated > > that he would do so, to the best of my knowledge this has not been done. > > We are working at understanding the nature of the objection as well. My > current understanding is that the objection is related to the scope of > the Working Group and which documents are considered to be on the W3C > Recommendation track [1]. Almost all emails related to the formal > objection and relevant for the topic are archived in www-archive or > w3c-archive. The message directly addressed to the team did not contain > the rational but Larry documented the rational for the objection at: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2010Feb/0100.html > > Per section 3.5 of the W3C Process [2], we are required to address the > objection and we intend to do so in a timely manner. At the moment, our > advise to the HTML Working Group co-chairs is to continue the CfC as > planned, and for Larry Masinter to reply to the CfC, as advised by the > HTML WG co-Chairs as well. > > Regards, > > Philippe > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Feb/0016.html > [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#WGAppeals > >
Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 19:10:32 UTC