Sam Ruby wrote:
Re: "we were told"... if you can tell me who told you that, I will
follow up... and resolve the issue.
Sure. It was Ralph, Steven, Ben, and me. We all agree that the current
task force cannot produce rec-track documents that involve HTML because
we are not chartered to work on HTML. YOUR committee can certainly
produce such documents. Thanks for inviting us to work with your group
and directly edit your spec. I am sure some of us will take you up on
that as time permits.
I would be pleased to release copyright on this document to the W3C
once someone in management there tells me there is a home for it.
Until then, ApTest is more than willing to support the activity.
Basically, and I am sure you agree with me here Sam, I refuse to let
bureaucracy get in the way of progress.
Do I qualify as "in management"?
See above, but no, you do not. The W3C Director and the Advisory
Committee approve charters, and the charter of the RDFa Task Force is
within the remit of two other W3C groups whose charters have either
expired or are expiring. Those charters are not going to be expanded to
encompass HTML4 nor HTML5 - at least, it seems pretty unlikely to me. I
imagine what *could* happen from a management perspective is that the
HTML Working Group could also join the party - becoming an additional
sponsor of the RDFa Task Force. However, given the HTML Working Group's
focus on producing a single specification rather than multiple specs
that inter-relate, it seems to make more sense (to that group) that
edits are just made directly on the monolithic HTML5 draft. As I
mentioned above, I am sure some of us will take you up on that offer.
Thanks again!
--
Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota Inet: sh...@aptest.com
