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

Re: TWO Change proposals for ISSUE-41 : Distributed Extensibility

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:09:44 -0700
Cc: "Ennals, Robert" <robert.ennals@intel.com>, HTMLwg <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <0922716F-E39F-449C-AC03-27EC5F3A71C8@apple.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On Mar 15, 2010, at 9:48 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Ennals, Robert wrote:
>>
>> Proposal Y: tries to give a better fallback and backwards-compat  
>> story:
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/fixedprefixsimple
>
> While I think this proposal is close to something that we should  
> probably
> add to HTML5, I don't think it's "Distributed Extensibility". It  
> would be
> more accurate to describe it as a convention for preventing vendor-
> specific non-standard extensions from clashing with themselves and  
> future
> standard development.

It seems to me that this proposal adds a new extensibility mechanism,  
and thus is in the scope of the issue as I presented it last month:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0796.html

The fact that you could also describe it in more specific terms, based  
on the nature and purpose of the proposed extensibility mechanism,  
does not make it out of scope for the issue.

You are correct that ISSUE-41 is extremely broad. This issue predates  
not only the current process, but also any of the current set of  
Chairs. Under the new Decision Policy, it's unlikely we would ever  
again end up with such a broad scope for a single tracker issue. That  
being said, I don't think it would be legitimate to summarily close  
the issue without considering proposals.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 16 March 2010 23:10:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:59 UTC