Re: On merging XHTML2 WG and the HTML WG

Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I noticed on your blog that you consider merging the XHTML2 and HTML WGs 
> a possibility. Do you have a plan on how to make such a merge work?

First, for background: I talk to a large number of people.  For example, 
I talk to people who actually believe in XHTML2, the semantic web, etc. 
  Normally I rely on openness to keep my stories straight, where people 
spot bug reports, and outright gaps in my knowledge (e.g. "The 
Workshop").  I intentionally asked your permission[1] to publish this 
question and answer for this reason.

What I published in "HTML5 Evolution" is a rough approximation of my 
sides of those conversations, carefully not attributing anything to 
anybody that I can't cite publicly.

The particular statement you are citing is one that made previously:

   http://intertwingly.net/blog/2008/12/15/Co-Chair-HTML-WG

And have discussed this with at least one of the co-chairs of the XHTML2 
working group (hint: one works at IBM).

Now, as to your question.  I do see the HTML working group allowing 
people who previously worked on XHTML2 to join the group.  I don't 
believe that it would be feasible for the HTML working group to 
contemplate a radical change to the HTML Design Principles.

This reminds me of a joke from the 80's, back in the OS/2 days: "Q: What 
do you get if you merge IBM and Apple?  A: IBM".

- Sam Ruby

P.S.  Per your request, I won't quote your second question, but the 
answer is equally public.  The XForms guys are working on an open source 
project named Ubiquity that allows XForms to work today in all major 
deployed browsers, and have published a working draft which details how 
XForms would work in HTML.  I cited both in "HTML5 Evolution".

[1] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20090316#l-45

Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 10:43:07 UTC