W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

RE: preparing WG publication

From: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 11:12:56 -0700
To: "'Edward O'Connor'" <hober0@gmail.com>, "Simpson, Grant Leyton" <glsimpso@indiana.edu>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D23D6B9E57D654429A9AB6918CACEAA97D2103D3D4@NAMBX02.corp.adobe.com>
I can certainly see that the WHATWG version of the document should link to the W3C version, since that is the official standard as issued by a recognized standards body.  However, I see no reason for the reverse, since anything that is in the WHATWG version will either be already in the W3C version _OR_ it will be "future stuff".


-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Edward O'Connor
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 1:32 PM
To: Simpson, Grant Leyton
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: preparing WG publication

Grant wrote:
> Will the expected process be to harmonize the differences between the
> W3C and the WHATWG specs? Will this be formalized in any way[…]?

We're chartered to "actively pursue convergence with WHATWG,"[1] so
yes—more-or-less—with the caveat that, while the HTML WG is working on
HTML5, the WHATWG is also working on HTML beyond what will end up in the
snapshot called HTML5. So, assuming we achieve our goal of convergence,
the HTML WG's HTML5 spec will be a subset of the WHATWG's HTML spec.

You might want to read what the editor wrote about this back in the
early days of the HTML WG.[2]

Leonard wrote:
> I think that any references to the WHATWG "version" of the document
> should be removed from W3C communications and documents.

Given our goal to actively pursue convergence, it's reasonable for both
documents to link to each other.


P.S. Why the scare quotes around version? [Please direct replies to this
     P.S. to www-archive.]

1. http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#conformance

   Oddly, section 4 "Relationship to External Groups" has no ID, so it's
   less cite-able than other parts of the charter.

2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0025.html

Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 18:13:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:03 UTC