[whatwg] Re: Is this introducing incompatibilities with future W3C work

Malcolm Rowe malcolm-what at farside.org.uk
Thu Jun 24 09:26:19 PDT 2004

Jim Ley writes: 

>> The roadmap is pretty clearly laid out in the group's Charter. There's
>> only one bit that isn't, and that's the intention to submit to a
>> standards organisation. I think I remember someone saying that we can't
>> talk about specific standards organisations, 
> Well Ian has said that W3 members can't say they're going to submit
> something to the W3, but since everyone keeps claiming that they're
> all individuals (they're not W3 members) then they would be free to
> say that they would hope they could submit it to the W3 if they can
> get a member to sponsor it.  Alternatively they could rule out the W3
> and say which other ones.  I don't think it should be too hard to
> provide a roadmap.

Ian's still a W3C member (as an invited expert to the CSS WG, if nothing 
else), so even if he's not representing the W3C at the moment, it's not 
unreasonable for him to continue to be bound by their rules. 

But yes, saying 'We intend to submit this to a standard organisation' should 
be something that can be included in the charter. That's the only thing, 
really, that they're missing. 


More information about the whatwg mailing list