[whatwg] Attitude and Direction of the WHATWG

[Ian Hickson]

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote, in part (as, in the 
interests of making progress, I have not cited or responded to sections of 
the e-mail that did not include actionable feedback):
> On 11/27/2010 2:50 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> > >
> > > I want to suggestion a reason for this impasse: the WHATWG intends 
> > > to produce a scene-graph specification. Other activities are out of 
> > > scope.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you really mean by "scene-graph specification", so 
> > it's hard to comment on that specifically. Historically, and still 
> > today, the HTML language and its associated APIs are generally 
> > intended to primarily convey semantics (meaning, as opposed to 
> > presentation) so that they can be rendered in a media-independent way 
> > on any device.
> 
> The HTML language has become even more semantic, less presentational, as 
> CSS+SVG profiles are enhanced.
> 
> These three sections of the HTML5 specs seem out of scope: "Loading 
> Webpages", "Web application APIs" and "Communication"

I must admit surprise to the idea that loading webpages is not in scope of 
the spec that defines the format used for web pages. :-)

The HTML spec is primarily an API spec, describing how a DOM tree can be 
manipulated from script and how it must react to user interaction. So the 
APIs seem entirely in scope.


> Unfortunately, contenteditable is less accessible to users than it 
> should be. I'd like to see that addressed.

Could you elaborate on how it is less accessible than it should be?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'