Re: [editing] Using public-webapps for editing discussion

On 9/22/2011 9:43 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Arthur Barstow<>  wrote:
>> Is there consensus within the CG to not move the spec to the REC track?
> The spec is in the public domain and anyone can theoretically submit
> it to the REC track, so consensus isn't an issue either way.  However,
> I hope others will not try to undermine the new Community Group
> process by taking its specs away until we've had a chance to give it a
> fair try.  Perhaps experience will wind up demonstrating that the
> Process still serves a useful purpose for specs like HTML Editing
> APIs, but we won't know unless we try.

Does it have to be an either-or situation? Given that there are 
pressures to publish in REC, to have a version which follows various 
procedures, it seems plausible that the two can coexist.

I don't see the conflict. The CG would continue to author the spec, 
while HTML5 might have a slightly different spec at times, when W3C 
process drives the decision-making in a direction that differs from your 

The Makefile helps you as an editor maintain a fork with minimal effort.

I don't think it's undermining the process of the CG if there are people 
working outside of the CG. Given your weight as an editor, I'm certain 
that Editor Free Draft will always be given due attention.
Though it's sometimes cumbersome, I've accepted that I must review at 
least two drafts when looking at specs these days. I'm at peace with 
that, now. In some part, it's actually helpful, as more voices are heard.


Received on Thursday, 22 September 2011 17:04:37 UTC