W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2012

Re: HTML WG status report to Lyon AC meeting

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 08:02:45 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2=A4V3AcyhGknm59NHq=Mj2iHs55FVSDuXjHLWuqWn3Ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi everyone,

Thanks for sharing this on this. It's particularly helpful for those
of us (like myself) that are not at TPAC.

I'd actually like to take this as the basis for a discussion about
versioning numbers.

I've been thinking about the version number of the next version of
HTML for a bit. While a number doesn't seem all that important, I
believe it is actually a strategic decision and a big signal that we
are sending to the world by picking that number.

Version number schemes are now well understood - so much so that there
is a whole website dedicated to explaining what you should do:
http://semver.org/ . While it focuses on software, there is one
important message to take away: minor number changes indicate small
additions/changes, major numbers indicate big new features & changes.

In the public eye, Web2.0 changed the world from static to dynamic Web
pages [1] and HTML5 codified in technology all the things that people
wanted to do in Web2.0 apps that were so hard to do with HTML4 and
JavaScript alone.

It is not difficult to predict what HTML.next will be about: the list
of extension specifications, the creation of a media subgroup, the
work of the Web & TV WG - they are all pretty big indicators where the
next big thing is happening. And it's also pretty clear that it won't
all be ready for HTML5.0 yet.

Therefore, let me make a bold proposal. It'd like to suggest we name
the next version HTML6 and one of its goals will be to take Video on
the Web to its prime time.

Yes, there are other things happening, too - things like responsive
Web design, security & privacy issues, and all the other things we've
been working on for a long time (i18n, a11y, semantic Web). But I
think the way the public will look at it, the next big step for the
Web will be video - on every screen in every device delivered through
the Web.

Do we want to deliver the next big thing for the Web under a minor
version number change? I don't think so and I'd like to see a
discussion about it here.

I think we should reserve the minor version number change to updating
HTML5.0: we call the current CR HTML5.0 - what do we want to call it
when we accept larger extension specs into it over the next months and
before REC? I think giving us the option to change HTML5.0 to HTML5.1
for minor additions is a good one to keep.

In parallel we can start developing the next big thing for the Web
under a proper new version number and it's not just a minor patch -
it's a proper new thing. It deserves a proper new number - let's call
it HTML6 and let's publish the FPWD as HTML6.0.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:21 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Yesterday Maciej, Philippe, Mike Smith, Robin and I gave a report on the
> HTML WG status to the W3C AC meeting.
> The report is also publically available at
> http://www.w3.org/2012/10/html5-update.pdf
> Please let us know if you have any comments or questions on this report.
> /paulc
> HTML WG co-chair
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 21:03:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:28 UTC