- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 10:35:06 +0100
- To: "Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>
- Cc: "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>, "Process Discussions" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 20:20:48 +0100, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu> wrote: > (12/03/23 23:20), Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> The way I (and others) approached this is by forking part of the HTML >> standard and demonstrating our ability to maintain it and address >> feedback more effectively than Ian. That's how you do this. > > And the only such a fork from a non-browser related person was Areyh > Gregor's Editing API spec, but he doesn't really count as a non-browser > person for a while now because he got contracted by Google and then > Mozilla. > > Seriously, as far as I can imagine, the more effective way of getting > resource here is if we first promise the newcomer that he/she can be > listed as an editor and then he/she can apply company resource to work > on the specs. I know that doing this instead of the "demonstrate your > ability first" approach might result in specs with bad quality (I know > this happened before), but given Hixie expressed opinions that he longer > cares about W3C HTML5, I see little reasons why we can't try this out > for W3C HTML5. I'm happy to be proven wrong. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Saturday, 24 March 2012 09:35:45 UTC