It seems the two hours are up, but I wanted to ask a question anyway.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:53 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> I'm still considering between two different endings:
>
> ...
Note that they are already actively ignoring the WHATWG.
> =
>
> One of the major
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
>> On 09/10/2015 06:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> > If I am the only one that wants to put in a formal objection here,
>> > then I'll let it go and go with whatever everyone else think we
>> > should do.
>> >
>>
>>
On 09/11/2015 04:53 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
On Tuesday 2015-09-08 17:33 -0700, Tantek Çelik wrote:
Follow-up on this, since we now have two days remaining to respond to these
proposed charters.
If you still have strong opinions about the proposed Web Platform and Timed
Media Working Groups
On Friday 2015-09-11 09:43 +0200, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> It seems the two hours are up, but I wanted to ask a question anyway.
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:53 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
> > I'm still considering between two different endings:
> >
> > ...
>
> Note that
On Friday 2015-09-11 00:46 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> The HTML WG has historically has contained so much noise that next to
> all productive contributors has left the group, leading to the being
> unable to create almost any useful contributions to HTML5. This has
> been such a big problem that
If I am the only one that wants to put in a formal objection here,
then I'll let it go and go with whatever everyone else think we should
do.
/ Jonas
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:22 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 2015-09-08 23:25 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> On Tue,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/10/2015 06:36 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> If I am the only one that wants to put in a formal objection here,
> then I'll let it go and go with whatever everyone else think we
> should do.
>
FWIW, I agree with Jonas that this is a terrible
On Tuesday 2015-09-08 23:25 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:59 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>
On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:59 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>> > The W3C is proposing revised charters for:
>> >
>> > Web
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> From everything I've seen, I don't expect much work around HTML beyond
> taking/merging bugfixes. I'm hoping with the new license that if W3C makes
> its own bugfixes that we find a way of propagating those bugfixes to
On Tuesday 2015-09-08 23:25 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:59 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
>
On Wednesday 2015-09-09 08:49 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Let me put it this way, how would you feel about integrating the HTML
> WG into the W3C Style WG?
If the HTML part of the WG were using asynchronous decision making
on a separate mailing list, I don't think it would be a big deal.
(It
Follow-up on this, since we now have two days remaining to respond to these
proposed charters.
If you still have strong opinions about the proposed Web Platform and Timed
Media Working Groups charters, please reply within 24 hours so we have the
opportunity to integrate your opinions into
On 08/15/2015 10:24 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 11:59 AM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
The W3C is proposing revised charters for:
Web Platform Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/web-platform-wg.html
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:59 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
The W3C is proposing revised charters for:
Web Platform Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/web-platform-wg.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2015Jul/0020.html
This charter doesn't
Hi, DBaron,
I would like to support the creation of Timed Media Working Group. Because
Media Capture is one of other deliverables, I would like to put the work[1]
to this working group. Thanks.
[1]: http://chiahungtai.github.io/mediacapture-worker/
BR,
CTai
2015-08-10 2:59 GMT+08:00 L. David
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:49 AM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
I guess I have mixed feelings about that. It's advantageous to have
WHATWG specifications published under the W3C patent policy by this
working group, though that doesn't require technical work happening
in W3C.
For
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 11:59 AM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
The W3C is proposing revised charters for:
Web Platform Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/web-platform-wg.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2015Jul/0020.html
...
The Web Platform
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 8:59 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
Web Platform Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/web-platform-wg.html
Please reply to this thread if you think there's something we should
say as part of this charter review.
Jeff Jaffe told me at one point that
On 09/08/15 19:59, L. David Baron wrote:
The Timed Media WG splits some of the media work that was happening
in HTML (MSE, EME) into a separate group.
Do we see a risk here that this group will become captured by the
promoters of DRM, more than was possible when it was done in the HTML WG?
The W3C is proposing revised charters for:
Web Platform Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/web-platform-wg.html
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2015Jul/0020.html
Timed Media Working Group
http://www.w3.org/2015/07/timed-media-wg.html
21 matches
Mail list logo