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

Re: toward W3C Working Draft: design principles? spec? other? (survey)

From: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:28:31 +0200
Message-Id: <1E7CC579-F2D9-4B4F-8C89-8D9D4356C7F3@hibo.no>
To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>


On 4 Jun 2007, at 14:54, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> If you can't find rationale in the WHATWG or HTML WG mailing list  
> archives and are wondering why the feature is in the specification  
> (you can't think of any good reasons yourself) you ask on the  
> mailing list what the reasons for inclusion are. (And hopefully  
> then someone documents them on a wiki.)

OK. that seems like a reasonable approach.

But if no one produces convincing arguments for the feature, should  
it still be kept in the spec. or should it be removed?

Take for instance the recent discussion about the restrictions on the  
placement of the <base> element in <head>. I have not been able to  
find any justification for this on any mailing list (apologies if  
I've overlooked something). And so far no one has produced any  
convinging arguments for this other than an (as far as I can see)  
almost non existent efficiency gain. I'm not saying that more  
convincing arguments, use cases and research don't exist, but if they  
are not produced by someone, shouldn't this "feature" (like any other  
features without convincing rationales) be removed?

--
Henrik
Received on Monday, 4 June 2007 13:28:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:45 UTC