[html4all] HTMLWG was Re: html authoring guidelines
Charles McCathieNevile
chaals at opera.com
Sun Nov 25 05:36:16 PST 2007
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 02:59:08 +0100, Vlad Alexander
<vlad.alexander at xstandard.com> wrote:
> ...there are good reason why people who do want to participate on the
> development of the future markup language for the Web and have time to
> do so, "don't" join the HTML-WG:
OK, I understand that.
> 1. Some people are really turned off by the bullying tone taken by some
> WG members. Some feel that the HTML-WG culture is that of 'you are with
> us or you are against us'.
Indeed. This is a problem, although perhaps less so now than earlier, or
maybe just a lot of people have already walked away so the issue isn't
visible anymore. If you have specific examples, I encourage you to talk
tothe chairs and Staff contact, who spend time privately talking to many
people in order to try and improve things. If you have specific problems
with people from Opera, of course, you are welcome to contact me directly
since my day job includes overall resposnsibility for all Opera employees
working in W3C.
> 2. Some people strongly object/disagree with some of the design
> principles of X/HTML 5.
I suspect a lot of people disagree with something in the current drafts.
> Joining the HTML-WG is in effect endorsing the design principles of
> X/HTML 5.
Not at all. The Design Principles DO NOT reflect any consensus of the
group, but instead a working draft of some principles. I doubt they will
ever reflect a consensus of the group, but are a useful guide to ideas
that exist among members of the group.
> 3. Some people feel that the HTML-WG suffers from a 'not invented here'
> mindset, so prospective participants may not join because they feel
> their contributions will only be struck down.
Sure. This doesn't mean people cannot join, but that they do not. That is
still a problem.
To some extent I am a proponent of the "Not Invented Here" restriction -
in particular, I feel that it is generally not a smart move to reinvent
things that HTML already has, for example a lot of the accessibility
features of HTML 4 that are not in the current draft but should go back in
before the process is finished.
> 4. Some people feel that the X/HTML 5 spec is written to meet the
> needs/wants of browser vendors. Prospective participants from other
> interest groups may feel that their needs/contributions will be
> marginalized.
Again, this is a barrier based on perception and not a reason people
cannot join the group.
I think that a handful of browser vendors (four or five, out of a large
number) are regarded with almost excessive reverence by some participants
in the group. In their defence, those vendors collectively supply a lot of
the resources (I represent one, and have put up the resources to ensure
that the differences document is available, and more recently to provide a
guide to HTML5 for semi-normal people), and expect something back for
their trouble.
Finally, the reason the group exists in the first place is that XHTML2, by
not engaging the vendors of major browsers, has proven a total failure *on
the public web* - there is virtually none of it, and you can't read it
even if you find it unless you have a very specialised browser (Opera has
support for a large amount of it, but you need to do some serious
customisation and add some substantial extensions to handle it all,
includng Xforms and the rest). So it is important to ensure that browsers
will actually implement the results, if it is to be more than an exercise
in writing wishlists.
That said, the opinions of web developers, tool developers, educators and
writers, and various other groups, is very important. Likewise, people who
understand issues of translation, localisation and internationalisation,
and people who understand accessibility, the state and future of mobile
and other "non-traditional" browsing devices, are critical for the success
of the group.
> So it is important to have discussion and critique of X/HTML 5 outside
> the HTML-WG.
Hmmm. I think that it is valuable to have it. It is critical that it take
place in the group that will actually produce the specification. WHile
there is a large historical influence from WHAT-WG, and that is recognised
as one of the outside fora where people have discussions, the reason for
the group being at W3C is to make a W3C specification, and that means that
ultimately the one group that decides on the specification is the HTML-WG.
For that reason, it is critical that the results of any other discussion
are communicated to the HTML-WG. The editors of drafts can read anything
they want, and currently communicate parts of the discussions they happen
to be involved in or agree with or otherwise decide are interesting by way
of changes to the drafts. For the rest of us, if we don't know that
something is being followed up in the HTML-WG I think we have to presume
it is not. That doesn't oblige anyone to join the group. But it clarifies
what happens if nobody does.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try the Kestrel - Opera 9.5 alpha
More information about the List_HTML4all.org
mailing list