- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:56:23 +0100
- To: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Cc: Andrew Sidwell <w3c@andrewsidwell.co.uk>, Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>, public-html@w3.org
On 29 May 2008, at 17:28, Robert J Burns wrote: > On May 29, 2008, at 4:07 PM, Andrew Sidwell wrote: > >> Justin James wrote: >>> Is it the business of the HTML specification to define the >>> behavior of the >>> UA's UI in this manner? I truly hope not. Maybe there are other >>> instances in >>> the spec where stuff like this occurs, but this is logically equal >>> to, "UAs >>> that maintain a back/forward history must use a left-pointing and a >>> right-pointing arrow graphic on the buttons that provide this >>> functionality." >> >> The HTML5 spec should only be used to specify what is required for >> interoperability, nothing else. If the WG wants to recommend UI >> for browsers, it should do so in a seperate document, so as to not >> confuse what is required for interoperability. Either that, or >> take this up as an issue with individual browsers, because unless >> the implementors want to do this, the specification will be ignored. > > This is needed for interoperability. If an author uses meta > redirects that are handled properly by one UA, but cannot count on > them being handled properly by another UA, that is an > interoperability issue. What UI is used for redirects, however, is not an interoperability issue. The specification already defines how meta redirects are to be followed. I see no interoperability issues that leaves open. -- Geoffrey Sneddon <http://gsnedders.com/>
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 16:57:08 UTC