- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:25:28 -0700
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Mar 30, 2010, at 2:22 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: >> >> I'd like to point again to Tim's message >> (<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/ >> 0871.html>): >> >>> It is important (a) that the design be modular; (b) that the >>> specifications be kept modular and (c) that the communities of >>> expertise of >>> the respective fields (graphics and data) be involved in the >>> design process. >> >> Did we make any progress on (c)? >> >> Best regards, Julian >> >> > > Is Microdata being handled in a separate email list? That could go a > long way to help give the Microdata community existence independent of > the HTML5 spec. There's four factors I would consider important to determining whether there should be a separate email list for a particular draft: 1) Would the editor and existing community of reviewers for the spec feel more comfortable using the public-html list, or a separate list? 2) Would anyone be more likely to give technical feedback if there were a separate list? How many people? How much more likely? 3) Would anyone be less likely to give technical feedback if there were a separate list? How many people? How much less likely? 4) Is discussion of this particular draft creating a lot of noise that distracts from discussion of other specs? In this case of Microdata, I think the answers to (1) and (4) are clear (prefer public-html, not too much noise). (2) and (3) are judgment calls. I don't think I've heard from anyone who would be willing to review the Microdata draft, but only if there is a separate list for discussion. However, at least some active commenters have said that it would be a hassle for them to have to join another list. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 07:26:03 UTC