Re: Preparing to launch the Forms Task Force ...

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 07:58:38 +0100, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> The WHATWG isn't going to stop

I'm not saying it should, but I do wonder how the WHAT WG and the HTML WG  
can cooperate on developing specifications when the discussions are  
happening on two separate mailing lists. It is of course possible to  
cross-mail to both lists, but everybody knows how that works out in  
practice (my experience: it's a mess).

Having one mailing list, at least only one "normative", would help a lot.  
Perhaps the WHAT WG list could be used to flesh out ideas while the HTML  
WG list could be used to present these ideas in a more polished form so  
they are a step closer to be ready for inclusion in the specification?

There are probably other alternatives as well, but having two mailing  
lists that should each stand on their own and at the same time have very  
different people subscribing to them, will make it very difficult to be up  
to date on the current state of affairs, plus reaching consensus will be  
very hard.

> however, we could, with permission from Apple, Opera, and Mozilla, have
> both this HTML working group's specification and the WHATWG's  
> specification
> be the same actual document (just with different headers and styles). If
> we do this, I would be happy to act as editor for this working group's
> specification, and would ensure that it and the current Web Applications
> 1.0 specification stay exactly in sync (by simply editing one document).

I think this is a wonderful idea and have nominated you as editor already.  
Since that will solve the specification synchronisation problem, we still  
need to solve the discussion synchronisation problem. Any ideas on how we  
might do it?

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg           -=|=-        asbjorn@ulsberg.no
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

Received on Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:09:10 UTC