- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:27:36 +0000
- To: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+V=2jToP_OpgZFAJNN7fAbmNiEYfGj=NPLMef-SEMkKeXA@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks for getting the spec back on github in a form that can be easily edited! I am really excited to be able to get back into working on HTML at the W3C! I have started to file issues, and will start editing ASAP, who should I be talking to in regards to getting guidance on practicalities of the editing process? -- Regards SteveF Current Standards Work @W3C <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/> On 19 January 2016 at 19:20, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk> wrote: > Dear all, > > We've put a new draft of the HTML specification into GitHub: > http://github.com/w3c/html. > > You can read the editor's draft: > http://w3c.github.io/html. > > It is based on the W3C HTML 5.1 build scripts, synchronised to the WHATWG > source from 12th January 2016. > > We would like to check the interoperability of those changes, and work > towards a new Recommendation, with the understanding that anything which > isn't demonstrably interoperable when we publish will be removed from the > specification proposed as a Recommendation and incorporated into a later > update when it is. > > We welcome all pull requests for outstanding issues, in particular to fix > important interoperability bugs such as those affecting web developers > working on production web sites. Pull requests with supporting data to > justify a change are actively encouraged. All you need is a GitHub account, > and if you are not a member of the Web Platform working group, please > remember we work to W3C's patent policy terms [1]. This means anyone can > easily help us improve the existing HTML spec by contributing corrections > and clarifications. > > If you want to add a new feature to HTML, we encourage you to develop a > specification in the Web Platform Incubator community group [2] (or > elsewhere if you like). Wherever you work on the proposal, you should > consider bringing it to the Web Platform working group when it has buy-in > from a sizeable community who are prepared to ship it in production, when > it > is "reasonably clear" what the rough architecture is, but before you have > got every last detail sorted out. When a proposal has sufficient buy-in to > move it along the W3C Recommendation Track Process, bring it to this > Working > Group for wider testing and review, and formal standardisation. See the > "intent to migrate" template [3] for the kind of questions the Working > Group > will ask about new proposals. > > When HTML5 was published W3C announced its intention to continue publishing > updates, based on interoperable deployment, every year or so. We would > like > to meet this goal and publish a new improved Working Draft rapidly, as a > first step towards meeting that commitment to the community. > > The specification has been converted to be generated directly from the > source in GitHub, using Bikeshed [4]. Making bug fixes means editing HTML > source code. You should then run the Bikeshed processor to check for build > errors - this can be done locally, or online. > > One of our first tasks will be to triage the outstanding bugs in Bugzilla > [5], fix and resolve any quick editorial issues, resolve feature requests > with a recommendation to take the idea to the Web Platform Incubator > community group, and migrate all other issues to GitHub. Please file new > issues in GitHub. > > A year ago, there was a lot of discussion about modularising HTML and the > working group charter [6] calls this out as a deliverable, citing a > proposal > that Robin Berjon worked on [7]. The feedback we have received on the > proposed split by chapter is that it doesn't provide the benefits that > modularisation promises. To do this properly will require refactoring of > the > specification. We would still like to do this, but we recognise it is a lot > of work and there are drawbacks as well as benefits. > > One approach to test modularisation is to encourage people working on a > specific section to split it out from the "main" HTML specification, move > it > independently to Recommendation, so that it can be referenced normatively > from the base specification. This way we can get some experience of the > process without undertaking a massive project before we really know the > costs and benefits. > > We welcome feedback from WG participants on this approach, and on the HTML > plan itself. > > Finally, we also welcome expressions of interest from anybody who would > like > to join the editing team - for which the reward is hard work and the > satisfaction of a job well done. While anybody can submit a pull request > proposing a change to the specification, the editors will work together to > review pull requests and integrate them when they are ready. > > Regards, > Web Platform Working Group chairs and Team contacts > > [1] W3C Patent Policy > http://www.w3.org/Consortium/facts#patpol > > [2] Web Platform Incubator Community Group (WICG) > https://www.w3.org/community/wicg/ > > [3] Intent to Migrate > https://wicg.github.io/admin/intent-to-migrate.html > > [4] Bikeshed > https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed > > [5] Bugzilla bugs > http://tinyurl.com/nkjxluk > http://tinyurl.com/j78uzg3 > > [6] Web Platform Working Group Charter > http://www.w3.org/2015/10/webplatform-charter.html > > [7] Robin Berjon's module proposal > http://darobin.github.io/breakup/specs/ > > -- > @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2016 12:28:45 UTC