author-only view of HTML5 and ACTION-190

I am bringing forward how we handled ISSUE-59 since Noah M, (TAG Chair) asked me today to confirm that we did what we promised in the email below.



> There was general agreement that the author-only view of the main spec, plus a commitment to maintain it and improve its quality, was sufficient as a normative reference.



Useful references for this discussion are:

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/59

and Mike's action item that produced the first PWD of H:TML

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/168



>From the current Editor's draft:

http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html

> This specification is available in the following formats: single page HTML<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html>, multipage HTML<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/spec.html>, web developer edition<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/author/>.



The "author-only view" aka "web developer edition" appears to be available for the current Editors draft but the link that occurs in the Editors Draft is NOT available in the current TR version at http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html5-20101019/.  The link was previously published in the June WD: see http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-html5-20100624/



Mike Smith has explained to me that the link was not included on the last publication cycle since the "author-only view" did not pass pubrules and he could not get the problems fixed in the time we gave him to publish the 8 WD specifications.



Mike and I have created ACTION-190 to track the work needed to solve this problem:

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/190



/paulc



PS: This is TAG Issue-379.



Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada

17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3

Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329





-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Maciej Stachowiak
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 12:55 AM
To: HTMLWG WG
Subject: CfC: Close ISSUE-59 normative-language-reference (ends 2009-12-17)





At TPAC, we had a joint session with the TAG where we discussed their interest in having a separate language reference. There was general agreement that the author-only view of the main spec, plus a commitment to maintain it and improve its quality, was sufficient as a normative reference. There was also agreement that Mike's document would be useful and beneficial as a non-normative reference guide to the syntax. Therefore, it seems there is no more controversy over ISSUE-59, and we should close it by amicable resolution.



If there are no objections, this issue will be closed on December 17, 2009.



http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/59



Regards,

Maciej