RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
± From: Aryeh Gregor [mailto:a...@aryeh.name] ± Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:59 AM ± ± On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Ms2ger ms2...@gmail.com wrote: ± FWIW, Aryeh is currently studying full time and doesn't follow web ± standards discussions regularly. ± ± I do check them from time to time, though, and will check any personal e-mail I ± receive for the time being. In particular, I'm happy to answer any questions in ± public or private about the spec, particularly to help a new editor get the hang of ± it. It's giant and complicated and very hard to read -- which I suspect is an ± accurate description of implementations' source code as well! (At least I've ± heard terrible things about WebKit's implementation, and Gecko's I've seen. As ± specs get more precise, their complexity eventually matches that of ± implementations . . .) Thanks for taking time to help here. Your work is a major advance from spec vacuum that we had in the past, it will be very valuable to have your perspective and input as (hopefully) we get to move it forward. Alex
Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Ms2ger ms2...@gmail.com wrote: FWIW, Aryeh is currently studying full time and doesn't follow web standards discussions regularly. I do check them from time to time, though, and will check any personal e-mail I receive for the time being. In particular, I'm happy to answer any questions in public or private about the spec, particularly to help a new editor get the hang of it. It's giant and complicated and very hard to read -- which I suspect is an accurate description of implementations' source code as well! (At least I've heard terrible things about WebKit's implementation, and Gecko's I've seen. As specs get more precise, their complexity eventually matches that of implementations . . .)
RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
± From: annevankeste...@gmail.com ± Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 11:16 PM ± ± On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Alex Mogilevsky alex...@microsoft.com wrote: ± I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could ± benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating ± a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty ± involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other ± suggestions? ± ± I believe it still is, yes. (Although the draft does lack an editor and I believe one ± of the persons actively working on this stuff at Google moved elsewhere within ± that company.) Good to know, thanks Anne! Now if this is the right place and a few people with interest in the topic start paying attention again, we could have a conversation...
Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
On 19/02/2013 05:56 , Travis Leithead wrote: Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. My recall is a bit rusty on that one, but I think that the situation was that: • WebApps is not chartered to publish this, so a CG was created. • But having the discussion on the CG list seemed like a bad idea since everyone is here, so the mailing list for discussion was decided to be public-webapps. I actually pinged Aryeh about this a week or two ago, but I haven't heard back. I'd be happy to take over as editor for this spec, it's a feature I've wanted to have work right forever. In order to make that happen (assuming that Aryeh agrees, or doesn't speak up), I propose the following: • Since I'm financed to work on HTML, transition this to an HTML extension spec (this probably only requires a few changes to the header). • The discussion can stay here (wherever people prefer that I'm already subscribed to — I really don't care). • The spec gets published through the HTML WG, since I believe it's actually viably in scope there already. All of the above assumes you're all happy with it, and the HTML people too. I reckon it could work though. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
On 02/19/2013 10:17 AM, Robin Berjon wrote: On 19/02/2013 05:56 , Travis Leithead wrote: Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. My recall is a bit rusty on that one, but I think that the situation was that: • WebApps is not chartered to publish this, so a CG was created. • But having the discussion on the CG list seemed like a bad idea since everyone is here, so the mailing list for discussion was decided to be public-webapps. I actually pinged Aryeh about this a week or two ago, but I haven't heard back. I'd be happy to take over as editor for this spec, it's a feature I've wanted to have work right forever. FWIW, Aryeh is currently studying full time and doesn't follow web standards discussions regularly. In order to make that happen (assuming that Aryeh agrees, or doesn't speak up), I propose the following: • Since I'm financed to work on HTML, transition this to an HTML extension spec (this probably only requires a few changes to the header). • The discussion can stay here (wherever people prefer that I'm already subscribed to — I really don't care). • The spec gets published through the HTML WG, since I believe it's actually viably in scope there already. All of the above assumes you're all happy with it, and the HTML people too. I reckon it could work though. Of course, I object to publishing this freely licensed specification in a working group that will insist on imposing a more restrictive copyright on it. HTH Ms2ger
Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
WebApps' last discussion about `group scope` and the HTML Editing spec was September 2011 [1]. At that time, WebApps agreed the Editing CG may use public-webapps since WebApps' charter then permitted WebApps to directly take on APIs that were removed from the HTML5 spec. Robin volunteered to help with the editing and he prefers the HTMLWG be responsible for Technical Reports publishing. That works for me. Re the discussion list, I am mostly indifferent. It would be OK with me if public-webapps continues to be the spec's discussion list (provided Robin and the editors track the provenance of contributions). I also agree we should discuss our preferences with the HTMLWG. -AB [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JulSep/1617.html On 2/19/13 4:17 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: On 19/02/2013 05:56 , Travis Leithead wrote: Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. My recall is a bit rusty on that one, but I think that the situation was that: • WebApps is not chartered to publish this, so a CG was created. • But having the discussion on the CG list seemed like a bad idea since everyone is here, so the mailing list for discussion was decided to be public-webapps. I actually pinged Aryeh about this a week or two ago, but I haven't heard back. I'd be happy to take over as editor for this spec, it's a feature I've wanted to have work right forever. In order to make that happen (assuming that Aryeh agrees, or doesn't speak up), I propose the following: • Since I'm financed to work on HTML, transition this to an HTML extension spec (this probably only requires a few changes to the header). • The discussion can stay here (wherever people prefer that I'm already subscribed to — I really don't care). • The spec gets published through the HTML WG, since I believe it's actually viably in scope there already. All of the above assumes you're all happy with it, and the HTML people too. I reckon it could work though.
RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. Aryeh may have more current info... From: Alex Mogilevsky [mailto:alex...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:14 PM To: public-webapps@w3.org Subject: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing? It looks like Editing API draft is currently abandoned and there isn't any activity on the topic in this list for a while (as far as I can find in the archives)... I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other suggestions? Thanks Alex
RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
It is my understanding that Aryeh is currently not working on Editing API (https://plus.google.com/100662365103380396132/posts/KyADU8K54uK) and there is currently no successor or plan for further work... I would imagine there is still non-zero interest in the subject, would be good to have a place to discuss... From: Travis Leithead Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:56 PM To: Alex Mogilevsky; Web Applications Working Group WG; Aryeh Gregor Subject: RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing? Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. Aryeh may have more current info... From: Alex Mogilevsky [mailto:alex...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:14 PM To: public-webapps@w3.orgmailto:public-webapps@w3.org Subject: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing? It looks like Editing API draft is currently abandoned and there isn't any activity on the topic in this list for a while (as far as I can find in the archives)... I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other suggestions? Thanks Alex
Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Alex Mogilevsky alex...@microsoft.com wrote: I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other suggestions? I believe it still is, yes. (Although the draft does lack an editor and I believe one of the persons actively working on this stuff at Google moved elsewhere within that company.) -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
