Re: are decisions on what get merged into HTML5 made behind closed doors?

Hi Sam,

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> All working group decisions are made publicly

>From what I have observed that statement is incorrect. A more accurate
statement would be that "All working group decisions have been
*published* publicly".

So my takeaways from this email thread are:

1. The HTML Co-Chair issue deliberations are held behind closed doors.
2. Decisions of what does go into the spec are indeed discussed,
deliberated, and most likely made on two very private lists.
3. The HTMLWG leadership is opaque and would like for it to remain
that way. e.g. pay no attention to the people behind the curtain.

Laura

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On 12/03/2012 08:48 AM, Laura Carlson wrote:
>>
>> The question is one of veracity.
>>
>> Does the HTMLWG have:
>> "two very private lists, where all the decisions about what actually
>> gets merged into the spec appear to take place."?
>>
>> Sam, is that statement:
>>
>> True or false?
>>
>> Pick one.
>
>
> Do you still beat your wife?  Yes or no?  Pick one.
>
> I refuse to play that game.
>
> Categorical statements I will make:  All working group decisions are made
> publicly, and are based on publicly made comments.  All updates made to
> Candidate Recommendation drafts will be made in response to bug reports.
> The Working Group is provided with ample opportunity to request that changes
> that have not been adequately pre-flighted with the group to be reverted.
>
>
>> Laura
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/03/2012 05:00 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Chairs,
>>>>
>>>> The following statement was made recently [1]:
>>>>
>>>>    "HTMLWG has two very private lists, where all the decisions about
>>>> what
>>>> actually gets merged into the spec appear to take place."
>>>>
>>>> If this is the case, it appears to be very troubling state of affairs.
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate it if the veracity of this statement was confirmed by
>>>> the Chairs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Editors, like yourself, make the initial determination as to what goes
>>> into
>>> specifications.  The chairs ensure that there is ample opportunity for
>>> the
>>> Working Group to review, comment on, influence, and ultimately overturn
>>> editor resolutions when necessary.
>>>
>>> If you know of any instance where editors have somehow avoided this,
>>> please
>>> let the chairs know of specifics, and we will investigate.  Here is a
>>> history of revert requests:
>>>
>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/revert-requests.html
>>>
>>> Here are the processes we are following for extension specifications:
>>>
>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#cr
>>>
>>> To date, no extension specification has been nominated for inclusion.
>>>
>>> And here is the process that we will hopefully shortly be following for
>>> CR:
>>>
>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#cr
>>>
>>> - Sam Ruby
>>>
>>>
>>>> [1] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20121201#l-144
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> with regards
>>>>
>>>> Steve Faulkner
>>>> Technical Director - TPG
>>>>
>>>> www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> |
>>>> www.HTML5accessibility.com <http://www.HTML5accessibility.com> |
>>>> www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner <http://www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner>
>>>>
>>>> HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
>>>> dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
>>>> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/>
>>>>
>>>> Web Accessibility Toolbar -
>>>> www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
>>>> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 21:49:14 UTC