To quote @tabatkins[1]:<p>"The W3C violates its own process, lets HTML go to CR with 100+ bugs still active: <a href="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=HTML5%20spec&product=HTML%20WG&list_id=3367" rel="nofollow">https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=adva...</a><p>(Regarding the process to move to Candidate Recommendation[2], which is what HTML5 just hit.)<p>[1] <a href="https://twitter.com/tabatkins/status/280825291620896770" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/tabatkins/status/280825291620896770</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs" rel="nofollow">http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transitio...</a>
As the WHATWG clearly states, HTML5 is a living standard, and evolving constantly.<p>W3C likes to have solid specs and therefore freezes it and gives it a name. Its nothing more than tagging a certain timepoint with a version number.<p>I prefer the living standard. However, giving it a version name makes it easier to comunicate about sometimes.<p>This blog posts makes it much clearer: <a href="http://blog.whatwg.org/html-and-html5" rel="nofollow">http://blog.whatwg.org/html-and-html5</a>
FTA:<p>1.7.1 How to read this specification<p>This specification should be read like all other specifications. First, it should be read cover-to-cover, multiple times. Then, it should be read backwards at least once. Then it should be read by picking random sections from the contents list and following all the cross-references.
Doesnt matter until all browsers implement correctly the spec 100% ( cf IE ). What i'd like to see is a certification process. It's good to have a spec , but there should be a HTML5 certification ( could be automatic , you pass a bunch of tests, you get it, you fail you are not HTMLX certified therefore users shouldnt use your browser ).