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

On Sep 27, 2014 2:20 PM, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>
> On 09/27/2014 11:57 AM, Brian Kardell wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2014 9:21 PM, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com
>> <mailto:singer@apple.com>> wrote:
>>  >
>>  > I could have asked the director myself. I am trying to determine
>> whether it is good enough for us, the plebs, the WG.
>>  >
>>  > >>
>>  > >> David Singer
>>  > >> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>>  > >>
>>
>> I think that if you look through the thread, sentiment seems clear -
>> even objections that were made are mostly resolved by w3c hosting an
>> exact copy for archival purposes.  Most of the rest seems to be
>> speculation about whether this would be approved, and what if it isn't?
>>
>> These are valuable conversations but I think they may seem to perpetuate
>> the idea that there is strong opposition to this, which I've not really
>> seen here.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest that asking Tim or doing a straw poll among ACs you
>> know about whether they would support what would appear to be community
>> consensus on this seems definitely more productive than lots of
>> continued what-ifs that may be discussing elaborate mitigation plans and
>> inadvertently sending a mixed message.
>>
>> I think +director is good here if it helps remove speculation even a bit.
>
>
> I don't fully see the value of asking a question of the form "if the
WebApps Working Group were to do something that they appear to be unwilling
or unable to do, would you approve of it?"
>
Am I doing that? As I said, looking at the thread it seems like there is
considerably agreement.  Am I missing it?  Who in the WG is unwilling or
unable/why - can you clarify?

> I also encourage you to not discount the input of PLH who has had a lot
more experience than I in taking questions like these to the director.

I certainly don't, i value his input.  Did I miss an important point he
made that seems like an objection?  I merely suggested that it seems OK for
Art to have done so given what at least from here looks as I explained.

His experience is that the Director takes the opportunity to look at the
actual specification text and other factors like test results.  My
experience is consistent with that.
>
It seems that, as you suggested earlier, others will have a say.  It seems
rational to make the case and see what they say.  I'm not on the WG, so
take it for what it's worth, but I hold this notion that this sort of
consensus is best built through actual dialog over speculation.  Just
because I think it's appropriate and efficient doesn't mean others have to
agree.
> - Sam Ruby