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

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

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:15:58 -0700
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Message-id: <7B06774A-7F7D-4044-9AE2-1CF317B3B98E@apple.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Aug 25, 2009, at 1:11 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Aug 24, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> 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
>> Right now I'm not clear enough on what info Roy thinks should be  
>> added to file it as a bug, but I will gladly do so if we can  
>> clarify the desired change  through further discussion.
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7422

This bug doesn't look accurate to me, because the name attribute on a  
elements is in fact listed as an obsolete feature. Specifically, <a  
name> is obsolete but conforming when the value of the name attribute  
is non-empty, and obsolete and nonconforming when the value of the  
name attribute is empty. The spec also says:

"Authors should not specify the name attribute on a elements. If the  
attribute is present, its value must not be the empty string. In  
earlier versions of the language, this attribute served a similar role  
as the id attribute. The id attribute should be used instead."

That's why I wasn't sure what more Roy thought should be added. (Also  
commented in the bug to that effect.)

Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 08:16:39 UTC

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