W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > June 2008

[Bug 5744] Improved Fragment Identifiers

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:40:25 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1K9s5Z-0006aI-IN@wiggum.w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5744


Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX




--- Comment #28 from Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org>  2008-06-21 01:40:24 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> ...reassigning to Mike for arbitration.

I will be closing this issue out as far as bugzilla discussion of it goes.

But note that does not in any way mean that this is somehow the terminal point
in discussion of the issue. It simply reflects that fact that after quite of
bit of discussion within bugzilla and an analysis of the issue by the editor,
it seems clear that we do not yet at this point have a definitive mandate for
including spec'ing this feature out and including it in the HTML5 draft.

For one thing (and this is perhaps the most important reason) it is not yet
clear that we can expect any kind of committment at all from browser vendors to
consider implementing this if we were to spec it out. It's also not clear that
HTML5 would even be the appropriate place to spec it (my personal opinion,
fwiw, is that it would not be).

So I think the next best step in the lifecycle of this issue is for Erik (or
anyone else with a strong interest in seeing this get spec'ed and implemented)
to take the appeal directly to implementors -- for example, by posting a
message to the public-html and perhaps to other lists specifically asking
browser vendors and other implementors to provide feedback on it.

That is not to say that browser vendors and other implementors are the only
stakeholders whose views are important. It is just acknowledging the fact that
feature proposals that have not yet shown a reasonable likelihood of actually
getting implemented are not proposals that we can as a group afford to invest a
lot of time in. In particular, the time and attention of the editor are a key
asset for the group, and we need to be very careful about not misusing that.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 21 June 2008 01:41:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 21 June 2008 01:41:01 GMT