On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ian, > > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 01:31:36 +0100, Aurelio De Rosa < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I think this should answer your question: >> >> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/**FAQ#What_is_the_WHATWG.3F<http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#What_is_the_WHATWG.3F> >> > > It doesn't seem to provide much useful information on the differences. > > According to its charter <http://www.whatwg.org/charter**>, WHAT-WG is a > group of 9 individuals who work with a very simple set of rules (basically > the editor of a specification decides what should be in it, but the 9 > people can decide other things by "overwhelming majority"). There is a > mailing list, IRC, etc, and everyone else who contributes to the discussion > is called a contributor. > More about how WHAT-WG works is described at http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/* > *FAQ <http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ> > > The HTML WG is one of the working groups of W3C. The working group has a > charter that describes some of how it works: <http://www.w3.org/2007/03/** > HTML-WG-charter <http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter>> W3C itself > is a consortium of member organisations, and the links from the HTML WG > charter to the process document will lead you into more information about > how W3C works. Note that in my personal opinion the Wikipedia page about > W3C is outdated and very poor quality information. > > cheers > > Chaals > > Hi Charles, Thank you for providing resources. I will try to determine what topic belongs to which group in the future. Kind Regards, Ian > > Best regards >> >> 2013/2/14 Ian Yang <[email protected]> >> >> Hi Steve, >>> >>> Thanks. And sorry, but til now I still don't understand the differences >>> between whatwg and html wg. Could you please explain? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ian >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Steve Faulkner >>> <[email protected]>**wrote: >>> >>> > Hi Ian, >>> > >>> > I cannot speak for whatwg, but from the W3C HTML spec side the main >>> element >>> > is in the HTML 5.1 spec and has been implemented in browsers and so >>> will >>> be >>> > added to HTML5 spec at some point as it likely meets the CR exit >>> criteria. >>> > >>> > as for it being a sectioning element, there is currently an open bug on >>> > that, which we be dealt with. >>> > >>> > If you want to discuss the specification of the main element in HTML >>> 5.1 >>> > specification feel free mail the html wg list. If you want to discuss >>> > definition as per the whatwg spec this is the place, although I will >>> > obviously follow ant discussions with interest >>> > >>> > regards >>> > SteveF >>> > >>> > >>> > Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:31:32 +0800 >>> > > From: Ian Yang <[email protected]> >>> > > To: whatwg <[email protected]> >>> > > Subject: [whatwg] Is <main> now an official HTML5 element? >>> > > Message-ID: >>> > > <CABr1FsfcaX8=B8TReG8Sz36W= >>> > >>> > h1w0hRY61+LG=Cebo-ZUWYfqA@**mail.gmail.com<[email protected]> >>> > >>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> > >>> > Hi editors and all other folks, >>> > >>> > I saw the SitePoint article "Introducing the New HTML5 <main> >>> > Element<http://www.sitepoint.**com/html5-main-element/<http://www.sitepoint.com/html5-main-element/> >>> >" >>> > yesterday. Does that mean <main> element has been approved by all >>> editors >>> > of the working group? >>> > >>> > However, in spec, it still says that <main> element is not a sectioning >>> > element. That means, in document outline, main content will form >>> another >>> > tree structure instead of appearing under the original website tree >>> > structure. Can we have somebody advise on this? Is there a special >>> > consideration to not making <main> a sectioning element? >>> > >>> > >>> > Sincerely, >>> > Ian Yan >>> > >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex > [email protected] Find more at http://yandex.com >
