- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 08:24:22 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13240 --- Comment #74 from Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com> 2011-11-06 08:24:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #73) > Can that be split into smaller issues? Yes, I guess most of the discussion has been about the data element and the time element so maybe: "Should HTML5 have a time element" "Should HTML5 have a data element" This does not really cover the pubdate attribute or the atom conversion section. But on the other hand I don't really object to removing them. > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Mar/0586.html > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/att-0218/issue-76-decision.html My issue with the schema.org examples could be handled as a counter-proposal if someone tries to re-introduce them in the spec ( after the revert ). -- 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 Sunday, 6 November 2011 08:26:32 UTC