- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:56:41 +0200
- To: "Laurens Holst" <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>, "Geoffrey Sneddon" <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:49:14 +0200, Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl> wrote: > That said, I don’t have any particular objections against integrating > the WHATWG’s specs as a whole. I only fear that with things like for > example <video> already having proactively been added to the published > specification draft, implementations even being made already, it will be > hard for me to effectively argue that <object> should be used. Do you think that would be different if only parts of HTML5 would be taken over? The people currently involved in <video> seem to be mostly on both WGs. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 11 April 2007 12:56:49 UTC