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

Re: Extension spec for hgroup (Was: Re: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014)

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:02:26 -0400
Message-ID: <505A40F2.8010700@intertwingly.net>
To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-pf@w3.org" <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, "public-html-a11y@w3.org" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> (janina@rednote.net)" <janina@rednote.net>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org> (jbrewer@w3.org)" <jbrewer@w3.org>, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
On 09/19/2012 05:49 PM, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> On 19.9.2012 22:33, Paul Cotton wrote:
>> We encourage discussion of this draft plan in response to this email.
>> We will also add this item to the respective agendas of the next
>> meetings of the HTML WG, the Accessibility Task Force and the PF WG.
> Hi,
> given the stress that the plan gives to modularity and to extension
> specs I'm surprised that it doesn't propose creating extension spec for
> hgroup:
>> 164 hgroup element
>> Retain the current hgroup language in the spec. Note that a number of shipping browsers implement the syntax. Identify the semantics as an at risk feature.

Why did you stop reading there?  The very next paragraph suggests the 
possibility that extension specs (plural) be written.

> My understanding is that semantic is unclear and browsers implement its
> syntax in the same way as for any unknown element. They will simply
> parse it into DOM.
> Removing hgroup from the core spec and creating separate extension spec
> will allow hgroup supporters to work on improving this element at their
> own pace. If such approach is proposed for some a11y features as way to
> go I don't see why it shouldn't be used for hgroup as well.

We are not proposing that the spec be preemptively changed at all based 
on what might meet the exit criteria some day.  We do propose that work 
starts in October 2012 to identify and remove features that are unlikely 
to be stable enough to meet the exit criteria.

> Have a nice day,
> 				Jirka

- Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 22:03:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:27 UTC