Re: [w3c/charter-html] Charter must state a reason when duplicating work done elsewhere (#139)

@jeffjaffe asked:

> What would you say about work recently started in W3C and forked to the WHATWG? 

What are you referring to?  Does “W3C” include Community Groups?  

My thoughts on this thread:

- I hope the charter is explicit about work it plans to do that is downstream from WHATWG.  That certainly includes HTML and DOM, possibly others.

-  I agree with @frivoal  and others that the charter should be clear about W3C’s value add.  @LJWatson 's  text it a good start (but needs to mention WHATWG e.g. “It also enhances  the HTML Living Standard  with contributions from a broad range of stakeholders ….”)

- I like @tantek 's idea of refactoring the HTML accessibility work so that it extends / “deltas”  the HTML Living Standard to better meet accessibility (and perhaps other “horizontal”) criteria.  I would not want to hold up spinning off the Service Worker WG until that can be done, but it’s an idea to seriously explore for the next recharter.

As for the WHATWG relationship, I agree with @jeffjaffe  that it should be possible to re-build some sort of partnership, but the first move is mutual trust-building.  W3C might feel that HTML and DOM are “theirs” because they originated at W3C, but WHATWG feels that W3C let them rot from lack of maintenance (or outright rejection in the case of HTML circa 2004) and they deserve respect for revitalizing them as Living Standards. I definitely understand Steve’s concerns about “ the priorities and ideological orientations of the editors of the WHATWG spec are different to mine” and “ W3C… is still also the place where stakeholders with a commitment to accessibility, regardless of their affiliation with browser vendors, get a seat at the table”.  But it’s worth noting WHATWG has become less “ideological” recently,  and has published code of conduct https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct and work mode guidelines https://whatwg.org/working-mode  that imply some of @stevefaulkner 's concerns have been recognized and addressed.  

Bottom line: I believe that it would be  a respectful gesture to WHATWG for the WP WG charter to be explicit that some of its work is downstream from various Living Standards, and be clear about the value W3C proposes to add (patent commitments, wider review, and especially accessibility improvements). 


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/139#issuecomment-302167789