- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:37:07 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6774 --- Comment #21 from Nick Levinson <Nick_Levinson@yahoo.com> 2009-08-21 15:37:07 --- That mark is intended to allow third-party markup of a page in transit or as served without the user knowing is supported by this from a chat log (<http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080218#l-98> & <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20080218#l-99>, respectively, both as accessed 8-21-09): * * * * * # [01:29] <Philip`> "I also have some <mark>kitten</mark>s" - that makes me wonder whether "<mark>kittens</mark>" would be acceptable (from a cleverer search engine that detects words with the same basic meaning, rather than doing substring matches, and it might get <mark>young cat</mark> too) # [01:31] <Philip`> (I believe it is perfectly acceptable, but the example makes me wonder anyway, so maybe the example could say <mark>kittens</mark> to be clear that it's not meant to be strict about anything) * * * * * In one of the IRC logs also was a comment about not reading what's longer than a screenful. When a bunch of people make erroneous claims, especially when they're conflicting claims, a single informative reply to all of them will usually be longer. There also seems to be one commenter's view that the way the Internet was long ago defines how it's used today. Its growth includes website owners, probably a supermajority of whom require stability of what they send, perhaps not in the 1970s but definitely now, and the Web has to include them. Tell them that intermediaries may edit what's shown to users without users knowing and that commentator will get a surprising answer. Thank you. -- Nick -- 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 Friday, 21 August 2009 15:37:16 UTC