Re: Doing HTML the right way at W3C

On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 13:02 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
> http://www.w3.org/html/ could very well evolve into what I am 
> suggesting.  Let's look at your list:
> 
> - Technical writ[ing]
> - Education
>   * Online training
>   * Course materials
> - Testing
> - Validators
> - PR materials
> - Certification

While I agree there is potential for a lot of those, I fail to see how
this is going to help with regards to technical writers and
certification in particular.

Technical writer is time intensive. I seem to remember that we've been
approached in the past but those attempts failed, simply because the
time commitment was too high. 

Certification isn't an open source project imho, especially since there
is liability surrounding this area.

> How should we populate such lists?  Here's a few places to start:
> 
> http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?q=html5
> http://twitter.com/#search?q=html5
> http://www.w3.org/html/planet/
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?keywords=html5&index=books
> 
> In fact, ask people to suggest links by specifying @w3c in twitter.
> 
> I would further echo Dave Ragget's comment that HTML either subsumes or 
> closely relates to things like scripts, styling etc and those things 
> should either be directly included or linked to.  Modernizr and 
> FaceBook's open graph protocol are very much a part of the HTML5 ecosystem.

Modernizr is quite nice but it's problematic as well. For example, it's
making claims that HTML5 Video is implemented by several browsers, while
there is still plenty of room for improvement in the implementations.
Firefox for example is starting to lag in terms of implementation of the
HTML5 video. I like Modernizr for a very rough overview perspective, but
I'd be reluctant to point folks to it as a measure of where HTML5 is
implemented.

Philippe

Received on Thursday, 22 July 2010 18:17:36 UTC