- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:57:29 -0500
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, Geoffrey Sneddon <gsneddon@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On Dec 7, 2009, at 9:12 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >>> I'm not sure that anyone is advocating splitting HTML from the HTML >>> DOM. I'm not sure it's worth discussing in depth unless someone wants >>> to propose doing it. >> >> +1 >> >>> If anyone does want to make that case that some aspects of the HTML >>> spec should be split from the spec for the HTML DOM, then the burden >>> of proof would be on them to show that this is (a) feasible and (b) >>> an overall improvement. >> >> re: (a) +1 >> re: (b) -1 >> >> In the (at present, purely hypothetical case) where somebody wishes to >> actively pursue this AND demonstrates that it is feasible, then we >> would need rationales for both sides. > > To clarify, what I meant by (b) is that a Change Proposal without > rationale would not be considered a valid Change Proposal. Thus, the > person wishing to pursue this would have to provide an initial > rationale, before anyone would be obligated to provide the opposing > rationale. +1 > Regards, > Maciej - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 7 December 2009 19:58:11 UTC