- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:55:19 -0400
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 08/10/2011 10:12 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote: > I tend to agree with Sylvia, and furthermore, am not convinced that > the current feature set of HTML5 is a good "checkpoint" by any > measure (implementation, feature stability, etc.) both from a > perspective of features in the draft and features outside the draft. > > I think letting HTML5 evolve a bit longer and seeing if there is a > convergence point among implementations and what features are or are > not supported would be a better approach. Do either of you have any specific features in mind? Can you please verify that there are existing bug reports and/or that these features are added to the wiki page: http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next > I don't think a spec-wide "Last Call" draft or period helps this > purpose and thus perhaps that aspect/phase of the process should > itself be called into question. We proceeded to Last Call based on the results of the following poll: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/html5-last-call-poll/results I do encourage both of you to participate any such polls that we might have in the future. > Thanks, > > Tantek - Sam Ruby > -----Original Message----- From: Silvia > Pfeiffer<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Sender: > public-html-request@w3.org Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:34:26 To: Maciej > Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com> Cc: HTML WG LIST<public-html@w3.org> > Subject: Re: HTML.next and Rechartering > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Maciej Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com> > wrote: >> >> Hello Working Group, >> >> Now that the Last Call period is over, it's a good time to start >> thinking about the next steps in the evolution beyond HTML5. >> >> There are a few ways we can start thinking and talking more about >> HTML.next: >> >> 1) Let's start up some discussion and collection of post-HTML5 >> feature ideas. >> >> 2) Though we cannot yet publish post-HTML5 deliverables as Working >> Drafts, nothing stops us from creating Editor's Drafts. So current >> editors and anyone else who is interested are encouraged to create >> post-HTML5 proposed Editor's Drafts for consideration, in parallel >> with the versions working their way through the LC process. >> >> 3) To be able to publish post-HTML5 delieverables, we will have to >> change the charter of the Working Group. There are two possible >> tracks we can take: A) Come up with a detailed definition of the >> requirements, scope, and expectations for our next-generation >> deliverables, and cast that as a new charter. B) Update the current >> charter and give a fairly loosely defined scope for post-HTML5 >> deliverables. >> >> Option A is much more clear about the next phase of our work, which >> is helpful in some ways, but it may require longer discussion to be >> clear about the scope. Option B likely requires less careful >> wording and negotiation. There is some interest in completing >> rechartering by the time of TPAC 2011. To achieve that, we'd have >> to have a draft charter ready in 3-5 weeks. We have W3C staff >> members who can help with the drafting. > > > Realistically, in 3-5 weeks, I don't think you can achieve 3.A) . > Also I wonder why we'd want to put a restriction on the features that > we want to add to HTML5. I think it's more productive to keep the > features open and just continue working on the spec. Which is in > fact already happening at WHATWG and it's good to stay in sync. > > Silvia. > http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML/next
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 12:55:48 UTC