Re: noted 3 issues re: time/data (was Re: minutes for HTML WG f2f, 2011-11-04, part 1)

2011/11/14 Sam Ruby <>:
> The current state of these proposals is that they have less detail in the
> "Proposal Details" section than we normally require. †This is not a problem
> if there is no contention. †So the way I would like to proceed is to:
> 1) Open up three issues per the above, and so so before this week's telecon.
> 2) Immediately issue a Call for Consensus on all three proposals.
> 3) Close by Amicable Consensus any issues for which we don't get pushback
> sufficient to convince the chairs that there will likely be a counter
> proposal.
> 4) Proceed with a normal call for consensus on whatever issues remain (if
> any).
> Does anybody object to proceeding in this fashion?
> - Sam Ruby

Not really an objection but a question. Iíll start looking into
creating a counter proposal to the data element proposal (if so, it
will be my first so I am sure Iíll need some guidance). Instead of a
new element this counter proposal would suggest how a new attribute
for holding machine readable data on the span element (and maybe other
elements) could work.

If this counter proposal would suggest that this new attribute should
replace the datetime attribute on the time element (I have not made up
my mind if this a good idea or not yet) should that be a separate
counter proposal or could that be a part of the counter proposal to
the data element?

- Peter Winnberg

Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 22:45:17 UTC