- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:20:38 -0500
- To: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
- CC: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Some time ago I raised what became HTML WG bug 9178 [1]. This was done representing myself, not the TAG. The concern I raised related to the conformance terminology in the HTML5 drafts. The status quo is that a document is considered to be a "conforming document" even if such conformance depends on the use of "applicable specifications" to extend the HTML5 language, or even possibly to change the syntax or interpretation of HTML5 existing HTML5 markup. My bug report proposed to change that so that the unadorned term "conforming document" would apply only to documents that conform to the unextended specification; I proposed that the extension specifications (I.e. the "applicable specifications") themselves should establish conformance terminology for the changes they introduce, with a common convention established along the lines of ("conforms to HTML5 as augmented by the XXXX and YYY specification", e.g. "conforms to HTML5 as augmented by the social markup extension specifications"), etc. For the record, I have been pleased with the level of consideration given by the HTML WG, and I see from the attached note that the HTML WG, having failed to reach easy consensus, has opened an "objection" poll for their ISSUE 140, soliciting objections to making the proposed change. I pass this on in case it is of interest to the TAG; I am not specifically asking that the TAG as a whole, or that individual TAG members who are on the HTML WG, do anything at this time (I presume that my personal preference regarding the poll is clear). If TAG members do feel this needs TAG attention, then please let me know and I will schedule discussion. Thank you. Noah [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9178 [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-140-objection-poll/ --------------------------------------------- From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Paul Cotton Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 10:42 PM To: public-html@w3.org Subject: ISSUE-140: conformance-terminology - Straw Poll for Objections ISSUE-140: conformance-terminology - Straw Poll for Objections The poll is available here and it will run through Thursday March 17: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-140-objection-poll/ Please read the introductory text before entering your response. In particular, keep in mind that you don't *have* to reply. You only need to do so if you feel your objection to one of the options is truly strong, and has not been adequately addressed by a clearly marked objection contained within a Change Proposal or by someone else's objection. The Chairs will be looking at strength of objections, and will not be counting votes. /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 15:21:08 UTC