On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:56:19 +1000, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:

> On Oct 29, 2006, at 19:16, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>
>> So what comes out will probably be a (perhaps evolved) version of  
>> WHATWG stuff, as has been the case in some other W3C groups already.
>
> That would be excellent.
>
> Perhaps I was overly worried, because I couldn't tell from the  
> announcement where this is going.

I hope so :)

>>>> Or will the WHAT WG activities continue with an endorsement from the  
>>>> W3C?
>>
>> I would be very surprised. As Tim notes, the WHATWG doesn't have what  
>> he calls "accountability measures" (by which I think he means a process  
>> with more of the checks and balances that are found in W3C's), which  
>> would make it hard for W3C to endorse anything WHATWG have yet to do.
>
> I don't expect the W3C to endorse the WHAT WG itself. What I meant to  
> ask if the WHAT WG spec drafts continue to be worked on under the banner  
> of the W3C.

This is an existing trend so I don't see why it wouldn't continue...

cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@o...          Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com