Re: proposal: have W3C HTML5 reference dated WHATWG URL standard rather than W3C copy

On 26/09/2014 02:04 , David (Standards) Singer wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2014, at 13:47 , Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:>
>> On 25/09/2014 19:10 , Ian Hickson wrote:
>>> I had been asked by the spec's editor to change the spec to make
>>> it more attractive to the W3C. I tried to minimize the changes by
>>> only making it a style sheet change. In retrospect, even this was
>>> indeed a mistake, since the document is supposed to be fixed in
>>> time and already has had several companies' lawyers sign off on
>>> it. So I've changed it back, and will leave it unchanged for all
>>> time. Live and learn.
>>
>> Shame, I have to say I quite enjoyed the notion of a Living
>> Snapshot ;)
>
> I really don’t think that a title change makes any material
> difference to an IPR commitment, does it?  Can someone say to the
> contrary explicitly why?

IANAL but I agree that it probably doesn't make a material difference. 
That said, people would have more trust and confidence in a snapshot 
that really doesn't change. And trust and confidence are things we need 
to build up. That's why I said this was "unfortunate", not for any legal 
reason.

> If we could make the document with an FSA on it, stable, and with a
> suitable title, I think this is a decent direction.

Amen.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Friday, 26 September 2014 13:54:18 UTC