Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Channy Yun wrote:
How about this action? I wonder whatwg's action to this activity.
I imagine that WHATWG contributors (probably including myself) will be
taking part in this work, in so far that it remains in line with our goals
(clean migration paths, backwards compatibility with deployed content and
UAs, forwards compatibility with future content and UAs, ease of authoring
and implementing, and so forth).
Those are definitely the goals of the WebApps WG. That of course leaves
a lot of room for disagreement, but then that's what WGs are for ;)
It is encouraging to note that the Web Apps WG's charter explicitly states
that the Web Apps WG will be trying to work closely with the WHATWG, so we
should look forwards to hearing from the Web Apps WG in this mailing list.
It is indeed our firm intention to have as high as possible commonality
in goals and work with the WHATWG. After all, if all the Good Guys
splinter off into their own corners instead of talking to one another to
solve their artistic differences, we're all of us screwed.
(Just out of interest, where did you see the announcement? It has been W3C
member-confidential for some time, but I did not know that the W3C had
publicly announced it and could not find any mention of it on their site.)
Likewise, I checked the W3C site and haven't seen anything. The voting
period ended yesterday but the results have not been announced, and I'm
fairly sure that nothing is officially known. Notably, the charter you
cite may have been modified based on membership feedback, so I would
strongly advise caution as to the deliverables you mention.
--
Robin Berjon
Senior Research Scientist
Expway, http://expway.com/
