- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:59:21 +0100
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > ... >> Looking at <http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions>, I see: >> >> "Process >> >> For the "Status" section to be changed to "Accepted", the proposed >> keyword must be defined by a W3C specification in the Candidate >> Recommendation or Recommendation state. If it fails to go through this >> process, it is "Unendorsed". >> >> For more details, see the HTML5 specification." >> >> But, as far as I can tell, the HTML5 spec itself doesn't specify the >> process. That appears to be a bug. > > That seems like it's worth filing in bugzilla too. <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8727> >> With respect to the proposed process: a W3C specification seems to be >> a *very* high bar; do we really want that? (Is this another bug to be >> raised?). > > I could imagine either filing this separately (hopefully with a concrete > proposal for what standard to use instead), or it could be part of the > same bug that suggests a meta/@name registry. There's the related issue that the bar for meta/@name appears to be much higher than for for @rel, which doesn't make any sense to me. But due to ISSUE-27 that might be changing. With respect to meta/@name: whatever the procedure is exactly, it should allow non-W3C members to define a new value, and it shouldn't be necessary to have a W3C Working Group for this. Is there a publication process inside the W3C that allows this? > ... >> b) the current text about the validity of unregistered link relations >> (DC-HTML uses a prefix for the relation, so it would need to define a >> wild card), and > > This is presumably covered by ISSUE-27; the registry would be the proper > venue to register DC-HTML link relations. Not really, as DC-HTML uses a prefix/localname notation inside the @rel value. There *are* matching URIs for the link relations, so what would be needed is HTML5 allowing full URIs without registration as link relations. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 21 January 2010 14:59:59 UTC