[whatwg] Technical Parity with W3C HTML Spec

[Adam Barth]

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 25.06.2010 18:11, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> ...
>> Alternately, we could continue work solely in the HTMLWG.  This would
>> not be possible unless we change the way the HTMLWG works somewhat,
>> though.  There's a *reason* that almost no technical discussion
>> happens within the HTMLWG.  If we were to pursue this option and
>> ...
>
> So what's the reason for that? Any opinion?
>
> Don't say "too much process discussions", because those are *caused* by the
> two groups not getting along too well.

It's a negative spiral.  The more epic threads about having epic
threads, the more technically oriented folks tune out, the less
technical discussion takes place, the more noise fills the room.  To
try to counter this downward spiral, I've been trying to direct my
technical feedback to public-html, with mixed success.

I think what's actually going on is that the spec is (for most intents
and purposes) done.  There isn't that much more technically to
discuss, which is why this list is much quieter now than it was a year
ago.  The W3C HTML WG still has a lot of angst that it needs to work
out, but that's much more smoke than fire.

IMHO, it's about time we shipped HTML5 and focused on HTML-next.

Adam