>So, barring objections from this working group, I'm going to make
>another revision to address this issue. I expect it will take a week
>to write and a week to review. So the target would be June 26 or so.
I object.
The goal here is an IETF RFC. The content of the document is obviously
controversial. For every "web consortium staff" member who thinks the
document is incomplete, there is another person who thinks it's already too
long.
I don't know who the people were who expressed this viewpoint, but I cannot
value their opinion with the same weight as the opinion of the many people
who have actively participated in this process all along. Those people want
this document to be DONE. We need closure on this, and we need it now.
If the W3C folk think we need more written material on lexical issues with
HTML, then let them write it up. Have them join the WG and we can work with
them on it as another followup document to the main RFC.
I agree that having that material written up would be useful and beneficial,
but I strongly object to placing that task right in the critical path of
getting our RFC done.
-- Eric W. Sink Senior Software Engineer, Spyglass eric@spyglass.com