I've taken what you (Tantek) wrote and made minor changes to yield the following Formal Objection to the Web Platform WG charter. Note that I added DOM 4 to the list, although perhaps there was a reason you didn't include it?
-David We request that the charter drop all REC track specifications that the WHATWG has demonstrated good maintenance of (as shown by active implementer participation and implementation, including by Mozilla in Firefox). We would optionally like to see W3C republish the current versions as a terminal NOTE, citing the WHATWG version as normative at the top of the NOTE in large text as we would for any other abandoned document for which better, more recent, or more accurate versions exist elsewhere. Particular specifications that we request WPWG drop from REC track deliverables: * HTML5.2: at this point we are not aware of *any implementer* (people actually committing code to browsers) paying any practical (in that it affects code) attention to HTML5.2, especially to any differences between HTML5.2 and WHATWG HTML, despite having editors from Microsoft and Google. It is unlikely that there are any patent/IP benefits to pursuing HTML5.2 (whose features are already covered by HTML5 REC) at W3C. * microdata: as previously noted, WHATWG maintains microdata, and there is no need for any W3C time spent on this. * DOM 4 / DOM 4.1: likewise, the WHATWG maintains the DOM specification, and there is no need for W3C to duplicate that work. Such duplication work by W3C WPWG is actively harmful in a number of ways. * It harms the relationship between W3C and WHATWG, both of which a number of organizations including Mozilla actively participate in. * This active relationship harm provides unnecessary friction, discourages collaboration, and demonstrates either neglect or outright passive ill-will from one or more of chair(s)/staff of Web Platform WG toward WHATWG, which is unacceptable behavior (and counter to W3C PWE). * Press and developers are continuing to be misled by the illusion that HTML5.2 is providing any kind of meaningful update to HTML, when meaningful updates (i.e., things that are implemented or fixed in browsers that web developers can then depend on) are only based on WHATWG HTML at this point. -- ๐ L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ ๐ ๐ข Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ ๐ Before I built a wall I'd ask to know What I was walling in or walling out, And to whom I was like to give offense. - Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
