- From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 11:28:35 -0500
- To: marcos@marcosc.com
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKdCpxyyS3-bFehEVX8-ET68tVk2_OER-RzeHxk03BaCZLPOZw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Marcos, While it may feel spammy to you, this is a long-standing part of the W3C Consensus process, and generally speaking all CfCs include the following: "Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence will be considered as assent." On the surface, and in principle, I disagree that the "only thing that matters is objections", as visible signs of strong support matter too. Receiving a handful of +1 emails is to me an acceptable process (unless this group chooses to use another means of confirming consensus: perhaps WBS surveys or similar?) JF On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:14 AM, <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote: > Can we please kindly stop the +1s spam? It greatly diminishes the value of > this mailing list. > > For the purpose of progressing a spec, the only thing that matters is > objections. > > > On 3 Jun 2016, at 12:36 AM, Mona Rekhi <mona.rekhi@ssbbartgroup.com> > wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > Mona Rekhi > > SSB BART Group > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Léonie Watson [mailto:tink@tink.uk] > > Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 8:48 AM > > To: 'public-webapps WG' <public-webapps@w3.org> > > Subject: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR) > > > > Hello WP, > > > > This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current > HTML Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been > posted to public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG. > > > > Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org no later than end > of day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence > will be considered as assent. > > > > The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that > make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better match > for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in > the spec [2]. > > > > When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per > section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be > made to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, > so we will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make > editorial updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be > removed if found not to be interoperable. > > > > The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify > at least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the > CR and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation. > > > > keygen element. [issue 43] > > label as a reassociatable element [issue 109] Fixing > requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues > 159/375/422] registerContentHandler [Issue 233] inputmode attribute of the > input element [issue 269] autofill of form elements [issue 372] menu, > menuitem and context menus. [issue 373] dialog element [issue 427] Text > tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461] datetime and > datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462] > > > > Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github. > To mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June > (ideally by filing an issue and providing a test case). > > > > At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating > the Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for > Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so > improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes > that didn't make it into > > HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the > specification. > > > > Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors. > > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/ > > [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes > > [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion > > > > [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43 > > [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109 > > [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links > [issue 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233 > > [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269 > > [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372 > > [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373 > > [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427 > > [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461 > > [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462 > > > > > > -- > > @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- John Foliot Principal Accessibility Consultant Deque Systems Inc. john.foliot@deque.com Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2016 16:29:04 UTC