- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 01:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>, PSIG <member-psig@w3.org>
Steve Faulkner wrote: > The spec has been forked and it can be expected that as new decisions > by the HTML WG up to and during last call do not go Ian hicksons way > we can expect to see futher divergence. The W3C spec is a fork of the WHATWG spec, sure, but I don't think the W3C spec has been forked further. Note that the divergences are the result of the HTML WG insisting on applying changes to the W3C version stream and those changes getting rejected from the version stream that existed first (i.e. the WHATWG version). Typically, when two concurrent version streams share a lineage but diverge, you call the more recently started version stream the fork. For example, LibreOffice is a fork of OpenOffice.org even if you like the governance of LibreOffice more. In general, when you seek to unfork something, the first step is ensuring that the delta in the fork is licensed in such a way that adopting it in the version stream that existed first wouldn't add restrictions to the licensing of that version stream. (That's not the only step, though. Hixie's comments around the recent divergences cite quality reasons for the non-adoption of patches.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 08:18:10 UTC