W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

RE: <progress> element and attributes vs. content

From: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:12:12 -0700
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9EF3B2C14D3B794EB33689E0E1BDFEEA3B20184E49@NA-EXMSG-C120.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
On Friday, August 14, 2009 3:56 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Tab Atkins Jr.<jackalmage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Indeed.  ;_;  I hate the ./, swap between various continental
> > languages.
> >
> > I would be inclined to take the English tradition (, as thousands
> > separator, . as decimal separator) as the default, as it is more
> > common on the web than the other.  Otherwise, there is *literally* no
> > way to resolve the ambiguity.
> 
> By that logic I would say that we should use Mandorin or Hindi/Urdu
> tradition as those are more commonly[1] spoken languages than English,
> thus I think it's a good guess that eventually they will be more common
> on the web.
> 
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers
> 
> / Jonas

It seems unreasonable to end up with a spec that works or not depending upon
which language you are using. I don't think it matters which language it works
for; if there are common languages it doesn't work for (and it seems like this
is the case) then I suggest we should drop the content parsing from the spec
and instead rely on the attributes.

Cheers,

Adrian.
Received on Saturday, 15 August 2009 03:13:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:50 UTC