- From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2014 11:32:36 +0200
- To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
03.10.2014, 20:46, "Brian Kardell" <bkardell@gmail.com>: > While it is potentially just adding fuel to a fire, I will mention > that as a developer, I like the idea that WHATWG had with > implementation status flags on sections and I feel like that helps > what you're saying Sam. I don't think this risks adding any fuel to a flame war - i believe there is violent agreement on this everywhere. The current W3C Process says [[[ A Public Working Draft is published on the W3C's Technical Reports page [TR] for review, [... and ...] should document outstanding issues, and parts of the document on which the Working Group does not have consensus, ... ]]] While this doesn't necessarily mean implementation status implementation contributes significantly to establishing consensus. and for all advancements in status (this doesn't apply to making a new WD, but that strikes me as a bug we might want to fix) [[[ should provide information about implementations known to the Working Group. ]]] The precise details of exactly how to provide the information are probably best left to the Working Group or editors, although some common tools would be helpful. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Saturday, 4 October 2014 09:33:08 UTC