Re: Proposed adaptive image element

Hi Maciej and Mat,

> It's a valid choice to put this before the group,

Maciej, thank you for the verification.

>  but I would recommend moving
> that bug to,

A few questions: Is there a timeline with milestones for
Could adaptive images be mentioned in the charter as a deliverable? If
I remember correctly, I think at one time Paul said that this proposal
could be discussed as part of the charter discussion.

> if the stakeholders are willing.

Mat, which do you prefer? Keeping the bug in HTML5 or moving it to

Best Regards,

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <> wrote:
> On Jul 25, 2012, at 12:47 AM, Henri Sivonen <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <> wrote:
>>> Without commenting on the merits of this particular case, I agree with Ted's
>>> comments that in general, we should hold off on adding HTML5 features.
>> Why is that just a general comment? I thought HTML5 was in feature
>> freeze except for adding accessibility features to complement other
>> features that went in before the freeze, but it appears that
>> is unresolved, so
>> maybe the feature freeze isn't in effect yet. What's the status of the
>> feature freeze?
> We do intend to enable that policy in the near future; it has been moot during the editorial interregnum. The more relevant policy change is this: <>. As far as we're concerned, we're already open to "too late for new features" as an argument. A proposed new feature would have to meet a very high standard to be included at this point. An example of a reason that may be sufficiently compelling would be missing accessibility functionality for features that are new to HTML5.
> That being said, the final decision always belongs to the WG. We can't categorically rule out that the WG would choose to accept a new feature by consensus, even if this delays the spec. But I at least would strongly encourage targeting new feature proposals for
>> has been filed in
>> the HTML5 component. I think that's confusing in the light of the
>> attempt to get to a feature freeze.
> It's a valid choice to put this before the group, but I would recommend moving that bug to, if the stakeholders are willing.
> Regards,
> Maciej

Laura L. Carlson

Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 19:43:09 UTC