W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Use Cases for The <canvas> Element

From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 05:47:48 +0200
Message-Id: <p0624064ac2d700e55182@[]>
To: <public-html@w3.org>

[Sorry, I'm too tired to think of a good new Subject for this. Not even that
interested in entering in a debate over this. Just sort of venting, perhaps.]

At 05:57 -0400 UTC, on 2007-08-01, Doug Schepers wrote:


>>> Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
>>>> As hard as I try, I don't see how to interpret that as anything else
>>>> then "UA vendors will do what they want, the rest of you will
>>>> just have to play by some rules we set for you".
> I'm very confused by this attitude.  Specifications without
> implementations are useless.

Sure. But the point was that proposals were constantly being dismissed with
the argument that they must first demonstrate the need as well as that the
proposed solution is the best possible one. Yet at the same time it appears
to be deemed unnecessary to provide such demonstrations for new things that
at this point already happen to be in the current version of the spec,
apparently "because they are already implemented in UAs".

(Sure, we hear that if there are problems with such already implemented
features, they will have to be addressed. But we all understand that once
something has beenimplemented by several UAs, the room to address issues,
will get smaller and smaller.)

Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 03:49:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:25 UTC