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

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

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:13:25 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908250509490.13844@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2009, at 6:01 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > 
> > > For example, <a name> has required processing associated with it, so 
> > > why not just define that under <a>?
> > 
> > The required processing for <a name> is in the same place as the 
> > required processing for id="", it's not in the Obsolete Elements 
> > section. (It's not in <a>'s section either, because it doesn't really 
> > have anything to do with <a> per se.)
> And it's not defined in either one of those places, so the issue is not 
> fixed.

I think we are running up against my lack of understanding of your view of 
how standards should work again. I'm still hoping that one day you might 
continue our conversation wherein I was trying to understand where you 
were coming from:


Without understanding your positions, I really don't know how to address 
your feedback. (For instance, above, you use the word "defined" in a way 
that is completely at odds with my understanding. A feature is fully 
"defined", as I understand it, by the combination of authoring and 
implementation conformance criteria, which we have for <a name>, yet you 
do not consider it to be "defined".)

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 05:12:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:50 UTC