W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > February 2005

[whatwg] [WA1] Markup for vCalendar and vCard

From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:50:00 -0500
Message-ID: <421E05B8.1050906@earthlink.net>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Boy did this get out of hand.
> Matthew. I encourage you to send your proposals to this mailing list. The 
> e-mail you sent with your proposal is still in my queue, along with all 
> the other WA1 and WF2 proposals that have been sent and have not yet 
> received technical replies. It will be given the same consideration as all 
> the other proposals, including Tantek's and anything else I (or whoever 
> the spec editor is at that time) come across.
> There is no conspiracy here.

    Give it up! I know it was you and Tantek flying over my house in a 
black helicopter last night trying to reprogram me with radio waves!

> Please relax.

    I find it's usually unwise to say this to someone who is truly upset. ;)

> The only reason I suggested 
> contacting Tantek is because I know he's been working on this topic, that 
> he has some very good ideas, and that he is welcoming feedback. I would 
> have thought that working with him on a proposal would have been more 
> productive than working on independent proposals. However, that was merely 
> a suggestion and was not meant to imply that other proposals would be 
> ignored or given a different level of consideration.

    Glad we cleared that up then.

> In particular, please don't think that I will be swayed by flashy 
> graphics, fancy markup, diagrams, or wiki-based development.

    I never meant to imply this. I was trying to avoid a situation where 
a section of the spec was being developed outside of WHATWG in a way 
that gave people unequal opportunity to express their views and opinions.

> Also, progress on WHATWG specs is going at its own rate, and is not 
> controlled by progress on external drafts or proposals.

   That's what I wanted to hear.

> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Matthew Raymond wrote:
>>In fact, I've been asking for a WHATWG wiki for quite some time.
> I don't have the resources to set that up, but if you want to set up a 
> wiki.whatwg.org site I could get you an account. However, I'm not really 
> sure what the point is. As far as I'm concerned this mailing list is the 
> most convenient way for me to handle input. I wouldn't monitor a wiki (or 
> probably even look at it) if one was created.

    I've had several situations where people didn't understand the ideas 
I was presenting because they were spread out over several emails. 
Often, someone would confuse a concept I was advocating with an 
older-but-similar concept I had abandoned. Take the following concepts, 
for instance:

  * <format>
  * <dateinput>
  * <date> (as an input control)
  * <idate>
  * <icomplex>
  * <dataentry>

    They're all closely related to each other. In fact, <dataentry> is 
pretty much the same as <icomplex>. If there was a simple wiki I could 
use to maintain my ideas about the general topic, I could simply post 
the URL at the beginning of a message rather than having to hunt down 
all my messages and giving a long explanation of what parts were relevant.

    If I can find a way to set up a wiki for WHATWG, though, you'll be 
the first to know.

>>Actually, you gave a specific time you'd be working on it...
>>"I'm not planning on touching the relevant sections of WA1 until 
>>Tantek's drafts are much more stable."
> I spoke ambiguously, my apologies. What I meant was that by the time I 
> next touched those sections, I expected Tantek's drafts to be much more 
> stable. (In particular, I am currently prioritising folding HTML4, XHTML1, 
> and DOM2 HTML into WA1, adding the section on the Window interface, and 
> speccing the new interfaces for networking and messaging. There is a LOT 
> of work there.)

    Oh, I know you're busy, and that it often takes you a long time to 
get to some portions of a spec. I objected to what I thought was you 
saying you wouldn't even look at anything until Tantek's draft ready, 
which appears to be a miscommunication at this point.
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2005 08:50:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:39 UTC