Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Alexander Schmitz]

+1
Alexander Schmitz
jQuery Foundation


On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Ian Pouncey  wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2 June 2016 at 13:48, Léonie Watson  wrote:
>>
>> Hello WP,
>>
>> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
>> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted
>> to
>> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>>
>> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end of
>> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
>> will be considered as assent.
>>
>> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
>> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better
>> match
>> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
>> the spec [2].
>>
>> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
>> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
>> made
>> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
>> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
>> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if
>> found
>> not to be interoperable.
>>
>> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
>> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the
>> CR
>> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>>
>> keygen element. [issue 43]
>> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
>> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
>> 159/375/422]
>> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
>> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
>> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
>> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
>> dialog element [issue 427]
>> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
>> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>>
>> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github.
>> To
>> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally
>> by
>> filing an issue and providing a test case).
>>
>> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
>> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
>> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
>> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
>> that didn't make it into
>> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
>> specification.
>>
>> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
>> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
>> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>>
>> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
>> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
>> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
>> [issue
>> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
>> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
>> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
>> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
>> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
>> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
>> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>>
>>
>> --
>> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Ian Pouncey]

+1

On 2 June 2016 at 13:48, Léonie Watson  wrote:

> Hello WP,
>
> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted
> to
> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>
> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end of
> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
> will be considered as assent.
>
> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better match
> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
> the spec [2].
>
> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
> made
> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if found
> not to be interoperable.
>
> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the CR
> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>
> keygen element. [issue 43]
> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
> 159/375/422]
> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
> dialog element [issue 427]
> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>
> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github. To
> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally
> by
> filing an issue and providing a test case).
>
> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
> that didn't make it into
> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
> specification.
>
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>
> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
> [issue
> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>
>
> --
> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
>
>
>
>
>

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Adrian Roselli]

+1

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Dylan Barrell 
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Joanmarie Diggs  wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> --joanie
>>
>> On 06/02/2016 08:48 AM, Léonie Watson wrote:
>> > Hello WP,
>> >
>> > This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current
>> HTML
>> > Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been
>> posted to
>> > public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>> >
>> > Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than
>> end of
>> > day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
>> > will be considered as assent.
>> >
>> > The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
>> > make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better
>> match
>> > for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found
>> in
>> > the spec [2].
>> >
>> > When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
>> > section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
>> made
>> > to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so
>> we
>> > will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
>> > updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if
>> found
>> > not to be interoperable.
>> >
>> > The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify
>> at
>> > least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in
>> the CR
>> > and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>> >
>> > keygen element. [issue 43]
>> > label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
>> > Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
>> > 159/375/422]
>> > registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
>> > inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
>> > autofill of form elements [issue 372]
>> > menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
>> > dialog element [issue 427]
>> > Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
>> > datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>> >
>> > Please share implementation details for any of these features on
>> Github. To
>> > mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June
>> (ideally by
>> > filing an issue and providing a test case).
>> >
>> > At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating
>> the
>> > Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
>> > Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
>> > improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
>> > that didn't make it into
>> > HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
>> > specification.
>> >
>> > Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
>> > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
>> > [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
>> > [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>> >
>> > [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
>> > [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
>> > [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
>> [issue
>> > 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
>> > [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
>> > [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
>> > [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
>> > [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
>> > [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
>> > [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Download the aXe browser extension for free:
>
> Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/axe-devtools
> Chrome:
> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/axe/lhdoppojpmngadmnindnejefpokejbdd?hl=en-US
>
> Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond
> to it. - Lou Holtz
>
>

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Dylan Barrell]

+1

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Joanmarie Diggs  wrote:

> +1
>
> --joanie
>
> On 06/02/2016 08:48 AM, Léonie Watson wrote:
> > Hello WP,
> >
> > This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
> > Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been
> posted to
> > public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
> >
> > Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end
> of
> > day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
> > will be considered as assent.
> >
> > The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
> > make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better
> match
> > for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found
> in
> > the spec [2].
> >
> > When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
> > section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
> made
> > to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so
> we
> > will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
> > updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if
> found
> > not to be interoperable.
> >
> > The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
> > least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the
> CR
> > and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
> >
> > keygen element. [issue 43]
> > label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
> > Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
> > 159/375/422]
> > registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
> > inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
> > autofill of form elements [issue 372]
> > menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
> > dialog element [issue 427]
> > Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
> > datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
> >
> > Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github.
> To
> > mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June
> (ideally by
> > filing an issue and providing a test case).
> >
> > At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating
> the
> > Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
> > Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
> > improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
> > that didn't make it into
> > HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
> > specification.
> >
> > Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
> > [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
> > [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
> > [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
> >
> > [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
> > [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
> > [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
> [issue
> > 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
> > [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
> > [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
> > [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
> > [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
> > [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
> > [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Download the aXe browser extension for free:

Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/axe-devtools
Chrome:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/axe/lhdoppojpmngadmnindnejefpokejbdd?hl=en-US

Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond
to it. - Lou Holtz

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Joanmarie Diggs]

+1

--joanie

On 06/02/2016 08:48 AM, Léonie Watson wrote:
> Hello WP,
> 
> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted to
> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
> 
> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end of
> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
> will be considered as assent.
> 
> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better match
> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
> the spec [2].
> 
> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be made
> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if found
> not to be interoperable.
> 
> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the CR
> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
> 
> keygen element. [issue 43]
> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
> 159/375/422]
> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
> dialog element [issue 427]
> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
> 
> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github. To
> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally by
> filing an issue and providing a test case).
> 
> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
> that didn't make it into
> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
> specification.
> 
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/ 
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion 
> 
> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links [issue
> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461 
> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462 
> 
> 

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Alex Danilo]

+1 for moving HTML5.1 to CR.

Alex

On 3 June 2016 at 05:30, Gez Lemon  wrote:

> +1
>
> On 2 June 2016 at 13:48, Léonie Watson  wrote:
>
>> Hello WP,
>>
>> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
>> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted
>> to
>> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>>
>> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end
>> of
>> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
>> will be considered as assent.
>>
>> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
>> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better
>> match
>> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
>> the spec [2].
>>
>> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
>> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
>> made
>> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
>> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
>> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if
>> found
>> not to be interoperable.
>>
>> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
>> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the
>> CR
>> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>>
>> keygen element. [issue 43]
>> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
>> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
>> 159/375/422]
>> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
>> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
>> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
>> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
>> dialog element [issue 427]
>> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
>> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>>
>> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github.
>> To
>> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally
>> by
>> filing an issue and providing a test case).
>>
>> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
>> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
>> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
>> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
>> that didn't make it into
>> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
>> specification.
>>
>> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
>> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
>> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>>
>> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
>> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
>> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
>> [issue
>> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
>> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
>> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
>> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
>> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
>> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
>> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>>
>>
>> --
>> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> _
> Senior Accessibility Engineer
> The Paciello Group
>
> This message is intended to be confidential and may be legally privileged.
> It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please delete this message from your system and notify us
> immediately. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or
> omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on this message
> is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Gez Lemon]

+1

On 2 June 2016 at 13:48, Léonie Watson  wrote:

> Hello WP,
>
> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted
> to
> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>
> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end of
> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
> will be considered as assent.
>
> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better match
> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
> the spec [2].
>
> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
> made
> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if found
> not to be interoperable.
>
> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the CR
> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>
> keygen element. [issue 43]
> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
> 159/375/422]
> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
> dialog element [issue 427]
> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>
> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github. To
> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally
> by
> filing an issue and providing a test case).
>
> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
> that didn't make it into
> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
> specification.
>
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>
> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
> [issue
> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>
>
> --
> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
_
Senior Accessibility Engineer
The Paciello Group

This message is intended to be confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this message from your system and notify us
immediately. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or
omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on this message
is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[wayne carr]

+1 for moving HTML5.1 to CR

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Steve Faulkner]

aye - (as TPG WG person)

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C


On 2 June 2016 at 13:48, Léonie Watson  wrote:

> Hello WP,
>
> This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
> Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR). It has been posted
> to
> public-webapps@w3.org as the official email for this WG.
>
> Please reply to this thread on public-webapps@w3.org  no later than end of
> day on 10 June. Positive responses are preferred and encouraged, silence
> will be considered as assent.
>
> The current HTML5.1 WD [1] improves upon HTML5. It includes updates that
> make it more reliable, more readable and understandable, and a better match
> for reality. Substantial changes between HTML5 and HTML5.1 can be found in
> the spec [2].
>
> When a specification moves to CR it triggers a Call For Exclusions, per
> section 4 of the W3C Patent Policy [3]. No substantive additions can be
> made
> to a specification in CR without starting a new Call for Exclusions, so we
> will put HTML5.1 into "feature freeze". It is possible to make editorial
> updates as necessary, and features marked "At Risk" may be removed if found
> not to be interoperable.
>
> The following features are considered "at risk". If we cannot identify at
> least two shipping implementations, they will be marked "at risk" in the CR
> and may be removed from the Proposed Recommendation.
>
> keygen element. [issue 43]
> label as a reassociatable element [issue 109]
> Fixing requestAnimationFrame to 60Hz, not implementation-defined [issues
> 159/375/422]
> registerContentHandler [Issue 233]
> inputmode attribute of the input element [issue 269]
> autofill of form elements [issue 372]
> menu, menuitem and context menus. [issue 373]
> dialog element [issue 427]
> Text tracks exposing in-band metadata best practices [Issue 461]
> datetime and datatime-local states of the input element [Issue 462]
>
> Please share implementation details for any of these features on Github. To
> mark other features "at risk", please identify them by 10th June (ideally
> by
> filing an issue and providing a test case).
>
> At the same time we move HTML5.1 into CR, we plan to continue updating the
> Editor's Draft, and in the next few weeks we expect to post a Call for
> Consensus to publish it as the First Public Working Draft of HTML5.2, so
> improving HTML will continue without a pause. It also means that changes
> that didn't make it into
> HTML5.1 will not have long to wait before being incorporated into the
> specification.
>
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team, and HTML editors.
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/
> [2] https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/changes.html#changes
> [3] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
>
> [issue 43] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/43
> [issue 109] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/109
> [issues 159/375/422] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/159 and links
> [issue
> 233] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/233
> [issue 269] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/269
> [issue 372] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/372
> [issue 373] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/373
> [issue 427] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/427
> [Issue 461] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/461
> [Issue 462] https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/462
>
>
> --
> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
>
>
>
>
>

Re: CFC: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)

[Chaals McCathie Nevile]

On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 14:48:10 +0200, Léonie Watson  wrote:


Hello WP,

This is a call for consensus to request that W3C publish the current HTML
Working Draft (WD) as a Candidate Recommendation (CR).


+1 Please do.

chaals - Yandex hat on, chair hat off

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
 cha...@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com