Since when is an affadavit of implementation part of the Last Call Process
Per this email(1) to the HTML WG, Sam Ruby, HTML5 WG Co-Chair wrote:
"On 12/09/2011 05:42 PM, Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> I see Ian replaced the entire Canvas 2D API spec. without a formal proposal:
Should a formal proposal not be forthcoming, and should you be able to
obtain testimonials from at least two major implementors that that they
would be willing to implement your proposal should it be adopted, then
you have nothing to worry about. "
Since when it is an affadavit of support from two implementors a requirement for a Last Call
document? And how do you define "implementor"? I would hope you wouldn't limit
"implementor" to browser, only, because libraries implement HTML; book readers implement
HTML; accessibility tools implement HTML; other tools implement HTML. I would hope that
the W3C isn't just turning over control of the HTML specification to, well, Google, and
perhaps one or two other companies.
Once the document has successfully completed LC, then the W3C will call for
implementations, but as far as I know, the HTML5 spec--whatever's left of it--isn't at this
Or has the W3C decided on the fly to change its procedures in order to accommodate the
HTML5 editor? Again?
I have to ask: is there any reason that anyone other than Ian Hickson be a member of the
HTML WG? I'm not saying this to be snarky; it is a legitimate question.
If I understand an earlier email related to <time> the editor's draft has again been changed to
reflect what Ian Hickson and his friend, want(2). The co-chair used as a reason for this action
that it is the editor's personal draft only.
Fine--but remove the link to the draft from the front page of the HTML WG (that's Working
_Group_ in case you forgot), because the only thing that should be linked on the front page is
a copy of the spec as it is decided on by the group.
Otherwise those of us on the outside are even more confused about what's happening in the
HTML WG--if that's even humanly possible.