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

Issues 93, 95, 96, 97 for the HTML WG

From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:59:11 -0500
Message-ID: <4C1A383F.4000802@burningbird.net>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, benoit.piette@gmail.com, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
I was originally concerned when I filed the bugs on removing details, 
hidden, aside, figure, progress, and meter that I was late in filing 
these bugs. At the time, I believe I should have filed these bugs a long 
time ago, before the existence of the elements (and attribute) became 
"codified" as part of HTML5.

I can see now, after the recent discussions regarding the figure and 
aside elements [1][2], that I was too early in filing the bugs and the 
eventual change proposals. The problem with the discussions about the 
elements and attribute at this time is that there is minimal (or no) 
implementation for each, and therefore we really can't fully judge 
whether the elements/attribute are useful or not. Or, for that matter, 
if the elements/attribute have the potential to be harmful. From the 
recent discussions, we're still not sure what each element is, and when 
and how it should be used.

Decisions have been made by the co-chairs on two of the items, figure 
and aside, but not on the others. I will not be objecting to the 
figure/aside decision, but am holding open the option to raise the issue 
with these elements again, once there is at least the minimal two 
implementations necessary for the elements to remain in the final 
release of HTML5. This should be allowable because the changed 
circumstances at that time will be implemented elements, where there is 
no implementation now.

I am also willing to forgo the co-chairs having to make a decision on 
the remaining change proposals:

Issue 93 on removing details

Issue 95 on removing the hidden attribute

Issue 96 on removing progress

Issue 97 on removing meter

Removing my change proposals would be contingent, though, on there not 
being an objection to my doing so from those who have objected to the 
counter-proposals for these items. If any of the individuals cc'd in 
this email wish to continue their objection to the counter-proposals for 
any of these items, I will continue my change proposal for the same item.

My objections to these elements and attribute still stand, as they are 
defined and worded in the HTML5 specification. My willingness to 
withdraw the change proposals now is that I believe it would be more 
appropriate to discuss the relevance and usefulness of these items when 
we've actually had a chance to see them implemented in a couple of 
browsers. We may find at that time that some of those who would support 
these elements and attribute now, would not do so then. And perhaps some 
who don't support the items now, would do so once they see an actual 
physical implementation.

Regardless, I believe it would be easier to focus on the technicalities 
of these items in our proposals and objections when we have actual 
technical implementations to review, test, evaluate, and compare across 
implementations. The browser vendors have expressed willingness, even 
eagerness, in implementing these items, so I expect that we will see 
implementations for all of these items in at least two browsers quite soon.

I apologize for not sending this email sooner. Again, it was only the 
recent discussions about figure and aside that made me realize that I 
was, perhaps, premature in my objections to these elements and attribute.

I will abide by the will of those who have objected to the 
counter-proposals, and to the co-chairs, of course. Note, though, that 
regardless of decision, I will not formally object to the result, if the 
result were to go against my change proposals. However, I will hold open 
the option of raising issues with these elements at a future time.

Also note that my objection to the co-chairs "grouping" these items for 
handling still stands. However, the objection is not a formal one, and 
is meant as a recorded protest against the co-chairs uneven handling of 
these items.

Thank you

Shelley Powers

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0096.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Jun/0142.html
Received on Thursday, 17 June 2010 14:59:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:50 UTC