Re: New split-out drafts

On Sat, 09 Jan 2010 01:00:12 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

>
> As part of addressing some bugs over the past few days, I've reorganised
> the HTML5 spec into a number of subspecs.
>
>    http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/html5/spec/Overview.html?content-type=text/html
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/vocabulary/Overview.html
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/core/Overview.html
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/Overview.html
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/2dcontext/Overview.html
>    http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/Overview.html
>
> I'd like to propose that we public FPWDs for these new drafts (all but  
> the
> first once above, which we've already published; presumably a regular WD
> would be suitable at this time for that draft).

For reference, which bugs is this intended to address?

It looks like the split between vocabulary and core has already been shot  
down, but I'll still add that I also disapprove of it because it only adds  
process overhead for no actual benefit. The multi-page view is a much  
better solution for those who don't like big documents (such as myself).

I also don't see much sense in the <canvas> 2d context split, in that it  
isn't really useful to any other specification and also a serious <canvas>  
implementation without the the 2d context is highly unlikely. Even if  
there would be something remotely useful with a split, the process  
overhead it adds weighs heavily against it.

The microdata split isn't optional at this point, so I can only support it.

(I have no opinion on postmsg because I'm not at all familiar with it.)

If this is the "solution", WONTFIX is a better one. Given the  
inter-tangled cross-references (mostly necessary because of the reality of  
the Web platform) this can hardly even count as an exercise in spec  
purity. I don't think this WG should be wasting its time with the  
document-shuffling that this amounts to.

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software

Received on Saturday, 9 January 2010 14:32:21 UTC