8727 2010-01-12 17:21:18 +0000 registration procedure for meta/@name values 2010-10-04 13:58:45 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED WONTFIX TrackerIssue P2 normal --- 1 julian.reschke ian ian mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 30986 0 julian.reschke 2010-01-12 17:21:18 +0000 The spec currently points to <http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/MetaExtensions> for the registration procedure. That's a problem in itself, as the registration procedure should be part of the spec and not a moving target (which I think a Wiki entry is). The wiki page itself says: "Process For the "Status" section to be changed to "Accepted", the proposed keyword must be defined by a W3C specification in the Candidate Recommendation or Recommendation state. If it fails to go through this process, it is "Unendorsed". ..." This text should be part of the HTML5 spec. Whether a Wiki is a good registry, and whether the registration requirements themselves make sense are orthogonal issues. 31594 1 ian 2010-02-06 10:53:38 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: The spec does define a process — it says "Anyone is free to edit the WHATWG Wiki MetaExtensions page at any time to add a type", and lists the conditions such registrations have to follow. Beyond that, there's no need for a hard-and-fast process, and we can let a community grow around the wiki page to maintain it if they so desire. So long as they're not jerks, I don't see any particular problem — and if they are, then they'll just be ignored, and another registration mechanism will be the de facto standard instead. 31597 2 julian.reschke 2010-02-06 11:02:05 +0000 Sorry, but document conformance can't depend on something for which no process is defined. (It might be ok if this didn't affect conformance) 32042 3 ian 2010-02-14 10:26:17 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: > Sorry, but document conformance can't depend on something for which no > process is defined. Of course it can. There's nothing magical about processes. 32175 4 julian.reschke 2010-02-16 13:50:24 +0000 Now raised as http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/102 32423 5 ian 2010-02-18 23:04:47 +0000 reresolving since this was escalated — please don't both reopen and escalate a bug, they are mutually exclusive states.