W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2010

Re: HTML+RDFa is in-scope for HTML WG Charter

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:08:03 -0800
Cc: RDFa WG Team/Chairs <team-rdfa-chairs-wg@w3.org>, Philippe le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, W3C Archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-id: <418500FA-61E2-4DE7-9590-532E809FF105@apple.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>

On Feb 26, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> cc+: Chairs of HTML WG

I agree with Philippe's reply, but just to expand on a couple of  

> On 02/26/2010 01:05 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Manu Sporny wrote:
>>> Since HTML+RDFa is in scope, and since there is a RDFa WG committed
>>> to continuing work on RDFa, HTML+RDFa should be a deliverable REC of
>>> HTML WG, right?
>> The question is whether we really _need_ such an assertion. What I  
>> mean
>> is, is there an assertion for any of the other rec track documents?
> Well, there used to be only one REC track document: HTML - all the  
> other
> documents have been split out to other WGs, like WebApps.

I'm missing the context here. Where would this assertion go? What  
exactly would it say?

>> The
>> HTML+RDFa doc has been published as a draft and will be continued  
>> to be
>> done so. I do not think this question really arises (nota bene, the  
>> same
>> question can be raised for the microdata and canvas documents, that  
>> were
>> the subject of the last round of discussion...)
> So, I think that my question is fairly simple, then.
> When we were publishing HTML+RDFa as a FPWD, and then again in the  
> most
> recent draft, it was repeated several times that (paraphrasing): "Just
> because the HTML WG is publishing HTML+RDFa now does not mean that we
> intend to commit to publishing it as a REC".
> Has HTML WG, with the recent charter update, committed to HTML+RDFa  
> as a
> WG deliverable? This text seems to imply that it has:
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#deliverables
> Can I start telling people that RDFa is planned to be released as a  
> part
> of HTML5?

For all our Working Drafts, there is no firm guarantee it will proceed  
to REC. The Working Group could decide to abandon the deliverable  
instead of taking it to Last Call. This is true even for the HTML5  
draft itself. But it would be fair to say that we are currently  
treating HTML+RDFa as a REC-track deliverable.

Received on Friday, 26 February 2010 22:08:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:45 UTC