[whatwg] Administrivia: Update on the relationship between the WHATWG HTML living standard and the W3C HTML5 specification

[Jukka K. Korpela]

2012-07-25 20:40, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>> Just so that it's possible to understand how to name the two new
>> branches correctly, can you confirm that the W3C branch is now called
>> "HTML5" and the WHATWG branch is named 'HTML Living Standard'.
>> Is this the long term project name, or just a working title?
>
> The WHATWG spec is just called "HTML", "Living Standard" is what it is. As
> we've gone through half a dozen names already for this spec (XForms Basic,
> Web Forms 2.0, Web Applications 1.0, HTML 5, HTML5, Web Applications 1.0
> again, and now HTML), I don't intend to change it again, but who knows. :-)

The practical problem with names is that we need to communicate what we 
are referring to, in an understandable manner.

"HTML" is far too broad, and "Living Standard" doesn't even say this is 
about HTML. "HTML Living Standard" would do I guess, even though it 
sounds more like a credo than a technical reference. I suppose "WHATWG 
HTML" might be used as a fairly neutral expression.

> As of the last time the W3C equivalent spec was updated, it was titled
> "HTML5", but you'd have to ask the W3C what their plans are.

"HTML5" has become a rather loose expression, so we may need to use a 
phrase like "W3C HTML5", or maybe "W3C HTML5 draft(s)", in contexts 
where the difference between W3C HTML5 and WHATWG HTML might matter.

Yucca