W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Responses to Last Call survey objections

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 11:01:34 +0200
To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
Message-ID: <op.vv2zcww0wxe0ny@widsith.local>
On Wed, 25 May 2011 21:12:40 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  

> ... we would
> like to take the time to address all objections entered in the hopes
> that at least some objectors are willing to put aside their objections
> to proceeding to Lat Call.

Thank you for taking the time do do this. I think it is extremely helpful

> == HTML5 ==
> John Foliot, Laura Carlson, Joshue O Connor
> - Believe it is wrong to call this "Last Call" instead of "Request for
> Public Comments".The W3C Advisory Board manages the evolution of the W3C
> Process Document. We can pass this feedback along to them, or better
> yet, these WG Members can do so directly.

Speaking as a member of the Advisory Board, I can confirm that this  
question is one that is under consideration (not least because it was  
explicitly raised to the AB by an invited expert). As *a* member of the AB  
(as far as I can report there is not yet a consensus on this question) I  
agree that the process needs to be re-aligned with reality here. But in  
the meantime I think it makes sense to work within the process we have,  
which I don't understand as actually prohibiting going to last call with  
outstanding issues.

> In addition, the status section will likely make clear that this Last
> Call may not be the last word.

I think that would be helpful.

> Laura Carlson
> - Objected that accessibility dependencies are not satisfied. This will
> be reflected in the status section.
> - Objected that people with disabilities may have trouble using
> bugzilla. We will do everything we can to help such folks enter their
> comments and follow progress. There is a bug recording this concern:
> <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10525>

I agree that this is important. If it causes substantive problems, I hope  
people will at least report during the last call that such a problem  
occurred so we (by which i mean the chairs :P ) can patch the necessary  
information into the process.

> == HTML Canvas 2D Context ==
> Simon Pieters
> - Voted yes but has reservations about caretBlinkRate. We note that this
> was a WG decision and he can get involved in one of the efforts to
> request reopening. The decision is here:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Apr/0271.html>
> Charles McCathieNevile
> - Voted yes but indicated possibility of raising bugs/issues during LC.
> We encourage him to do so.

The caretBlinkRate issue mentioned by Simon is the current issue we  
consider most likely to result in a comment from Opera. In any case, we  
intend to raise such issues as we consider important as part of the last  
all process.

> == HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives ==
> Simon Pieters, James Graham, Henri Sivonen, Boris Zbarsky, Edward
> O'Connor, Tab Atkins, Daniel Glazman, Lachlan Hunt, Eric Carlson,
> Charles McCathieNevile, Judy Brewer
> - Objects to publishing as REC-track instead of as Note, since it is a
> "techniques" document. See below.
> Henri Sivonen, Edward O'Connor, Lachlan Hunt, Eric Carlson
> - Object to the fact that this document claims to normatively replace
> sections of other deliverables. We advise them to file a bug on that
> statement if it is objectionable.
> Danny Ayers, Monika Trebo
> - Believes that this should be merged into the main spec, resolving any
> conflicts in the process. We encourage them to file bugs on the
> conflicts if they wish to pursue this goal. We also note the following
> decision relevant to this topic:
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Apr/0453.html>

In practice Opera would like any *normative requirements* to become part  
of the HTML5 specification rather than remain in this document. We believe  
that there is valuable material in this document which would go beyond  
what we expect in the HTML5 specification, which is the material we would  
like to see become a Note.

Cheers, and thanks again


Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2011 09:02:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:38 UTC