- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:48:46 -0400
- To: public-html@w3.org
On 04/25/2012 06:35 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On 04/25/2012 06:18 AM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote: >> On 4/25/12 3:45 PM, "Silvia Pfeiffer"<silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> IIUC it provides for a legally clean contribution path of WHATWG >>> specifications into the W3C. >> >> Then by becoming a CG, that implies that there will no longer be two >> separate HTML specifications. The W3C HTML WG would be 100% responsible >> for the official standard and no references to any other "complete" >> document calling itself HTML would exist - is that correct? >> >> Instead, the WHATCG would simply develop and publish new material that >> does not copy any existing material from the HTML spec - as other CG's do >> today. >> >> If so - that sounds like it would indeed address Steve's concerns and >> would indeed "reunifying development of the open Web platform under the >> stewardship of the W3C.". If not, then I don't understand what the CG >> would be doing?? > > I encourage discussion about what the CG will be doing to go to the > mailing lists that are provided for that purpose: they are listed in the > top right of the following page: Oops: make that top left. > http://www.w3.org/community/whatwg/ > > Of course, people are welcome to provide brief announcements and > occasional pointers on this list to relevant discussions that occur > elsewhere. > > I also encourage people to read the FAQ that was prepared. In particular > Q5g: > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-stabilization-plan.html#Q5g > >> Leonard > > - Sam Ruby - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 10:49:18 UTC