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

Re: ISSUE-53: mediatypereg - suggest closing on 2009-09-03

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:37:01 -0400
Message-ID: <4A93403D.7070806@intertwingly.net>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> On Aug 24, 2009, at 6:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> 
>> Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> ...
>>> That should be simple.  Is there anybody who is *opposed* to HTML5 
>>> describing all elements/attributes of previous specs?
>>> Ian indicated that he believes that it does.  You have pointed out 
>>> that it does not currently.  If we treat these differences as bugs 
>>> (and add a history section, as you and Anne discussed), is this issue 
>>> resolved?
>>
>> Yes!
> 
> Add definition of <meta scheme> 
> <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7412>
> Add definition of <html profile> 
> <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7413>
> Please add a history section 
> <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7414>
> 
> I believe the editor intends to take action on all of these. Are any 
> other bugs needed?

Looks like <a name>:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1242.html

It also looks like we have Larry's concurrence (thanks Larry!):

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1222.html

In any case, I've already marked the issue as pending review.  And just 
so nobody can claim that they didn't have an opportunity to comment, 
let's keep with the schedule of closing this one on 2009-09-03, with the 
proviso that it can be reopened should any of the above bugs be closed 
as WONTFIX or otherwise addressed in a way that does not resolve this issue.

> Regards,
> Maciej

- Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 01:37:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:44 GMT