W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2015

RE: Proposed split of the HTML specification

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 20:54:26 +0000
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org)" <plh@w3.org>
CC: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>, Erika Doyle Navara <Erika.Doyle@microsoft.com>, "chaals@yandex-team.ru" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Message-ID: <BL2PR03MB6042362E88241E5020A1B5ED3A80@BL2PR03MB604.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
On Thursday, June 25, 2015 2:47 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> > Q5:  Robin's proposed split [2] appears to apply to only HTML 5.1,
> > will it also apply to HTML 5.0 for maintenance purposes?
> Any direct maintenance of the HTML 5.0 document is going to be labour 
> intensive because none of it can be automated. As you know, my 
> preference is always going to be towards automating as much of the 
> knuckleheaded stuff so that contributors can focus on technical issues.
> So my preference leans strongly towards moving forward with the split 
> 5.1 document family. One advantage is that they don't need to move 
> forward as a block (except probably for the FPWD). This means that if 
> there are crucial fixes in some of them, they can be taken to Rec 
> relatively faster.

The HTML 5.1 spec contains substantial new features in many sections.
This makes it a poor choice for bug-fix maintenance to HTML 5.0. This
Means our choice will be bug fix the monolithic spec or don't bother. With
the interdependencies between sections we also likely won't be able
to take the pieces to Rec if they depend on WD status parts that aren't
aligned with HTML 5.0.

If we produced a split spec from HTML 5.0 we could pretty much move
to Rec straightaway and then never touch some finished pieces (many of the
definitions for example). Using the 5.1 document we are going to need
to better understand the interdependencies to have a chance at moving
any part forward.

Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2015 20:55:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:14 UTC