The comments submitted on HTML 5.1 are archived at: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2016Oct/0003.html
-David On Thursday 2016-10-13 17:35 -0700, Tantek Γelik wrote: > For the record, I have reviewed the HTML5.1 changes: > > https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/PR-html51-20160915/changes.html#changes > > which are in themselves not the easiest to review, filed this accordingly: > https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/592 > > In addition to that editorial request, the one technically > objectionable change I found in HTML 5.1 is the re-addition of 'rev'. > I have commented on the issue that was used to add 'rev' back to HTML > 5.1 accordingly with reasons for why that was a mistake (and should > have never happened - might be exposing process issues that I may have > to deal with separately) > > https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/256#issuecomment-253674835 > > Other than that, I would re-emphasize Annevk's post: > > https://annevankesteren.nl/2016/01/film-at-11 > > Which covers higher-level problems with HTML5.1, most of which are as > of yet unaddressed. > > I believe this is sufficient to file a nonformal objection with those > two points (technical: drop rev, overall: HTML5.1 problematic as a > whole). > > Thanks, > > Tantek > > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:45 PM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote: > > On Wednesday 2016-10-12 11:22 -0400, Chris Hutten-Czapski wrote: > >> Can you provide any details (either inline, or a sampling of links) to > >> summarize the broader concerns that might not be encapsulated in the > >> document itself? > > > > Some links: > > https://annevankesteren.nl/2016/01/film-at-11 > > https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/507 > > > > -David > > > > > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:46 PM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote: > >> > A W3C Proposed Recommendation is available for the membership of W3C > >> > (including Mozilla) to vote on, before it proceeds to the final > >> > stage of being a W3C Recomendation: > >> > > >> > HTML 5.1 > >> > W3C TR draft: https://www.w3.org/TR/html/ > >> > W3C Editor's draft: https://w3c.github.io/html/ > >> > deadline: Thursday, October 13, 2016 > >> > > >> > If there are comments you think Mozilla should send as part of the > >> > review, please say so in this thread. (I'd note, however, that > >> > there have been many previous opportunities to make comments, so > >> > it's somewhat bad form to bring up fundamental issues for the first > >> > time at this stage.) > >> > > >> > Note that this specification is somewhat controversial for various > >> > reasons, mainly related to the forking of the specification from the > >> > WHATWG copy, the quality of the work done on it since the fork, and > >> > some of the particular modifications that have been made since that > >> > fork. > > > > -- > > π L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ π > > π’ Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ π > > 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) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-platform mailing list > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > > -- π L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ π π’ Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ π 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
