Repos and specs Re: [admin] Web Platform WG is the new WebApps

On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 18:48:31 +0200, Johannes Wilm  
<> wrote:

> Hey,
> thanks for the info.
> As I understand it, this has no practical impact on the editing  
> taskforce and these are more suggestions for future task forces, right?

That is how I understand it too.

> As for separate repositories: We have changed the number and names of  
> the specs we need numerous times now. If we create and delete a  
> repository every time we change the name or >the numbers and types of  
> specs, it would have turned into a complete mess.

Yes. I think the point isn't that every document written needs a new repo,  
but that mixing two different things like Web Messaging and  
ContentEditable in the same repo is a bad idea.
> Essentially we only have one single work item which is editing. We  
> should now now be very far away from being very clear on the names of  
> some of at least one the specs (the one >containing beforeEdit/Edit or  
> beforeInput/Input), and once that happens, I would be all for moving it  
> to it's own repository if we are clear that this these events will also  
> be added to old >contentEditable elements, text areas, input fields,  
> etc. .
> We couldn't do that hitherto because as late as late August it was  
> suggested we merge that spec with some of the other specs.

Yeah. We might work out how to split out editing into separate work items,  
but that isn't the highest priority work.

Note that we also haven't worked out properly what to do with HTML, which  
is clearly far too much stuff to have in one repo, beyond noting that "it  
is clearly too big to be a single work item"...



> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Marcos Caceres <> wrote:
>>>> On October 12, 2015 at 8:23:25 AM, Arthur Barstow  
>>>> ( wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> On October 10, the consortium formerly started the Web Platform WG
>>> [Charter] thus terminating WebApps.
>>> My expectation is this change will have little to no impact on any work
>>> started in WebApps. That said, please note the charter indicates
>>> WebApps' less developed specs (f.ex. the Editing specs) need some
>>> "incubation" before they may proceed on the Recommendation track.
>>> However, that was effectively how WebApps operated so I don't see this
>>> as a change - a spec still needs implementation commitments before
>>> advancing to the later Recommendation stages.
>> For incubation, members are welcomed to bring their specs Web Incubator  
>> CG:
>> The WICG can help members get specs into shape and connect them with  
>> developers and other implementers. It's a fast, IPR friendly way, to  
>> get ideas road-tested before formal >>standardization.
>>>>> The WPWG has its own Github repo [Github] and the group will not use
>>> W3C's wiki. (Only a small number of WebApps' Editors actively use W3C
>>> wiki documents (primarily IDB v2 features, Pointer Lock v2 features,
>>> Gamepad v2 features, and D3E) and I will work with those Editors to  
>>> move
>>> their relevant wiki information to their spec's repo.)
>> Please please please (please!), don't use a single repository as a  
>> dumpling ground for spec - it makes it impossible for people to follow  
>> individual work items, file bugs, etc.. Please use >>separate  
>> repositories for each work item.
>> I would suggest maybe making your own organization on Github, and then  
>> managing your specs through that. Again, see:
> --Johannes Wilm
> Fidus Writer

Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex - - - Find more at

Received on Monday, 12 October 2015 16:53:38 UTC