HTML WG Update (original) (raw)

TPAC 2011

3 November 2011

Santa Clara, CA

“HTML5: Edition for Web Authors” FPWD

In August, the HTML WG also published a First Public Working draft of the document**HTML5: Edition for Web Authors.**

• auto-generated subset of the full HTML5 specification
• not for user-agent implementors (omits UA implementation details)
• targeted toward Web authors and Web developers
• normatively defines just the syntax and semantics of the HTML language
• useful to anyone who just wants requirements on how to create orproduce valid HTML documents (not how to consume or process such documents)

Last Call numbers: Bugs/Comments

• 1550+ Last Call comments. For this Last Call round (LC1), the group received* about1550 comments on the HTML5 spec (spec “bugs”)
• More that 80% of comments already resolved. Of those ~1550 HTML5 Last-Call spec bugs, more than 80% (almost 1300) have already received a resolution from the HTML5 spec editor (Ian Hickson).
• Less than 20% (about 280) of the Last Call spec bugs/comments for the HTML5 spec are still awaiting resolution by the editor.

* Note: The 1550 LC1 bugs also include bugs that were filed after October 2010 but before the May 2011 LC1 start date.

Post-LC1 numbers: Bugs/Comments

These numbers are for the HTML5 spec only.

• So far since the close of the LC1 round, the group has received almost300 bugs/comments on the HTML5 spec
• Of those ~300 HTML5 spec bugs, more than 80% (around 250) have already received a resolution from the HTML5 spec editor (Ian Hickson).
• Less than 20% (about 50) of the remaining post-LC1 bugs/comments for the HTML5 spec are still awaiting resolution by the editor.

Last Call numbers: Issues

• “Bug” vs “Issue”. HTML WG editors are responsible for resolving bugs; anyone disagreeing with a bug resolution can “escalate” it into a WG issue.
• Chairs resolve issues. The HTML WG chairs have responsibility for resolving all HTML WG issues, using the HTML WGDecision Policy.
• 13 open issues. WG now has13 open issues awaiting resolution by chairs.
• Chairs act as a kind of court of appeals: collectchange proposals from WG members, evaluate those, adjudicate a decision on behalf of the WG.

“New Information” issues

• 11 closed issues flagged as “awaiting new information”.
  (10 against the HTML5 spec, one against the HTML+RDFa spec).
• Those 11 issues have previously been resolved/closed by the chairs already, but members of the group have since asserted that they plan to provide new information that chairs have not considered yet.
• Issues may be reopened. If/when new information is provided for any issue, chairs evaluate the info and decide whether to reopen it.
• If an issue is reopened, it cycles back through the steps defined in the HTML WGDecision Policy document.

Formal objections

• 9 open formal objections. (4 for the HTML5 spec, 5 for other specs; relate to text alternatives, RDFa, polyglot spec, ARIA, video poster, more).
• There is some overlap between the list of formal objections and the list of “awaiting new information” issues.
• Formal objections may decrease. The number of formal objections may decrease if/when chairs reopen any “awaiting new information” issues—and if chairs end up making a different decision about any of them.
• Director’s decision. Issues that remain in “formal objection” state will require a decision from the Director in order to be finally resolved.

Deadlines for moving beyond LC1

The chairs**announced a timeline** for moving beyond LC1.

• **31 Dec 2011**. Editors must have all LC1 bugs resolved.
• **14 Jan 2012**. WG members last chance* to escalate any resolved bugs to issues.
• **11 Feb 2012**. WG members last chance* submit change proposals for open issues.
• **10 Mar 2012**. WG members last chance* to submit counter-proposals for issues.
• **07 Apr 2012**. Chairs must have all issues resolved (must have all decisions made).
• **21 Apr 2012**. Chairs announce resolution to go to the next step.

* Note: last chance = “last chance to complete actions for this round”; any actions taken after the above dates result in consideration being postponed until later.

Next step: HTML5 CR in 2012?

The HTML WG is scheduled to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the HTML5 spec in mid- to late-2012.

Some spec changes in the last 12 months

• new bdi element (embedding user-generated content of unknown directionality); important for internationalization
• new track element (timed text tracks; e.g., captions); important for making video content accessible
• new mediagroup attribute (synchronized playback of mult-track video/audio); important for making video content accessible

Some possible HTML.next features

• element, for modal and non-modal dialog boxes
• inputmode attribute for elements
• element, for marking up interactive data/tables (e.g., spreadsheets)
• playback stats for media elements: decodedFrames, droppedFrames,
• extend media.canPlayType("video/foo") ?
• add a media.playLater() ?
• sufficient API support for in-band tracks, live content?

HTML5 spec license discussion

• PSIG proposed three candidate licenses for HTML5
• HTML WG surveyed, did not support any of the PSIG-proposed licenses
• W3C management has not further pursued any of the PSIG-proposed licenses
• In a separate decision, permissive licenses are now available in Community Groups