public-html@w3.org from February 2009 by author

Adam Barth

• Re: [whatwg] The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Friday, 13 February)

Alexander Surkov

• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)

Alexey Feldgendler

• Re: priority based loading of web page elements (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)

Andrew Fedoniouk

• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)
• [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Friday, 6 February)

Anne van Kesteren

• Re: R2866 : better talk about "CSS display" instead of "CSS tables" (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: DOM idiosyncracies and made-up tag names (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5 (Thursday, 12 February)
• designMode and scripts (designModeScriptBlocked) (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Joint task force on ARIA user agent implementation (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Rendering: more typos (Thursday, 5 February)
• Rendering: typos (Thursday, 5 February)
• Rendering: comments (Wednesday, 4 February)

Arthur Barstow

• Re: [Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5] (Monday, 23 February)

Asbjørn Ulsberg

• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Tuesday, 10 February)

Ben Adida

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Ben Boyle

• Re: [Bug 6536] New: Time element examples should be in the context of a goal-oriented microformat use case (Sunday, 8 February)

Ben Millard

• Re: Table feedback (Monday, 2 February)

Bill Lipa

• Re: The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Sunday, 15 February)

Boris Zbarsky

• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Thursday, 26 February)
• Dimension attributes and video (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: Rendering: default style for <figure> (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Sunday, 1 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Sunday, 1 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Sunday, 1 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Sunday, 1 February)

bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org

• [Bug 6637] New: Put boolean and enumerated attributes next to each other (Saturday, 28 February)
• [Bug 6630] New: Optionalness of start tags when element is empty (Friday, 27 February)
• [Bug 6628] New: WebSocket.URL and EventSource.URL should return the absolute URL (Friday, 27 February)
• [Bug 6618] New: </body> and </html> early on handled in a Gecko/WebKit/Presto-inconsisten way (Tuesday, 24 February)
• [Bug 6614] New: Restricting multiple character encoding declarations per document (Monday, 23 February)
• [Bug 6613] New: Allow <meta charset="UTF-8"/> in XHTML (Monday, 23 February)
• [Bug 6610] New: add a preventable forced-fragment method (Sunday, 22 February)
• [Bug 6609] New: negative keywords-not meta tags (Sunday, 22 February)
• [Bug 6608] New: please undeprecate <center> for older browsers (Sunday, 22 February)
• [Bug 6607] New: wrapping text to limit line length without a table (Sunday, 22 February)
• [Bug 6606] New: generic 3rd-party <mark>, Smart Tags, and Activities prevention (Sunday, 22 February)
• [Bug 6590] New: character encoding mapping needs to be used for form submission too (Tuesday, 17 February)
• [Bug 6586] New: Zero margin quirk not quite right (Monday, 16 February)
• [Bug 6585] New: Rendering: <marquee bgcolor> (Monday, 16 February)
• [Bug 6563] New: Specify if innerHTML setting should use the quirkiness of the document (Thursday, 12 February)
• [Bug 6562] New: Define parsing quirks (Thursday, 12 February)
• [Bug 6556] New: When parsing legacy color returns an error (Wednesday, 11 February)
• [Bug 6546] New: List event handler attributes for certain elements (Monday, 9 February)
• [Bug 6544] New: Allow width=0 on <img> and <iframe> (Monday, 9 February)
• [Bug 6543] New: Mint a new element for figure captions (Monday, 9 February)
• [Bug 6536] New: Time element examples should be in the context of a goal-oriented microformat use case (Friday, 6 February)
• [Bug 6529] New: value DOM attribute for input element in File Upload state (Wednesday, 4 February)
• [Bug 6516] New: obsolete attributes on HTMLDocument assume there is a body element (Monday, 2 February)
• [Bug 6515] New: the body element event handler attributes and missing Window object (Monday, 2 February)

Cameron McCormack

• Minor parsing wording comments (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Charles McCathieNevile

• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: alt / no alt / etc Re: "downplayed errors" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)
• alt / no alt / etc Re: "downplayed errors" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Chris Wilson

• Assessing interest in meeting during the November W3C Tech Plenary/AC Meetings Week (poll coming) (Friday, 27 February)
• {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-02-26 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• RE: FW: [Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5] (Monday, 23 February)
• Action-83: 16x16 IE icon (Wednesday, 11 February)

Dailey, David P.

• DOM idiosyncracies and made-up tag names (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: Spec license use cases - WG Decision on the Record? (Saturday, 14 February)
• RE: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• RE: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• RE: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Dan Brickley

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Dan Connolly

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• minutes: HTML WG Weekly 26 Feb 2009 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: ISSUE-54 doctype-legacy-compat, was: Input on the agenda (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Input on the agenda (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Reuse of 1999 XHTML namespace, text/html and application/xhtml+xml media types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Joint task force on ARIA user agent implementation (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Wednesday, 18 February)
• google supports rel="canonical" (ISSUE-27 rel-ownership) (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status] (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status] (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Wednesday, 11 February)
• RE: Spec license (Wednesday, 11 February)
• revised table headers design is OK, right? (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh (License) (Monday, 2 February)
• scribe volunteers? (Monday, 2 February)

Daniel Schattenkirchner

• fieldset: a CSS block formatting context? (Saturday, 21 February)

David Bolter

• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)

David Poehlman

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (2 of 2) (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)

David Singer

• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)

Dean Edridge

• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)

Doug Schepers

• Re: Lose Focus When Hidden? (SVG ISSUE-2031) (Sunday, 22 February)
• Re: Lose Focus When Hidden? (SVG ISSUE-2031) (Sunday, 22 February)
• Re: alt / no alt / etc Re: "downplayed errors" (Thursday, 12 February)

Edward O'Connor

• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)

Geoffrey Sneddon

• Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: HTML 5 Spec, broken link (anchor) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5 (Sunday, 22 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5 (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5 (Thursday, 12 February)
• URL Parsing: Add note of what unreserved becomes (Saturday, 7 February)
• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Character Set Alias Matching (Sunday, 1 February)

Gez Lemon

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)

Gregory J. Rosmaita

• Re: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-02-26 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Thursday, 12 February)

Henri Sivonen

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: Foster-parenting and taint (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Foster-parenting and taint (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Foster-parenting and taint (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: frameset-ok as flag vs. insertion mode (Tuesday, 24 February)
• frameset-ok as flag vs. insertion mode (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Drop foster-parented stuff on the floor if parent gone (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Drop foster-parented stuff on the floor if parent gone (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Spec license (was: Re: Discussions with plh) (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)

Håkon Wium Lie

• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• RE: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)

Ian Hickson

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: bufferingThrottled and bufferingRate (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: another example canvas use- cufon - another accessibility concern and spec contradiction (Wednesday, 25 February)
• summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: frameset-ok as flag vs. insertion mode (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Drop foster-parented stuff on the floor if parent gone (Monday, 23 February)
• Input on the agenda (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: play() sometimes doesn't do anything now that load() is async (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Lose Focus When Hidden? (SVG ISSUE-2031) (Sunday, 22 February)
• Re: Media element events (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: video: various width/height attributes (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: bufferingThrottled and bufferingRate (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: several messages (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: [whatwg] The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Saturday, 14 February)
• Re: The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Saturday, 14 February)
• Re: The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: The <iframe> element and sandboxing ideas (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: designMode and scripts (designModeScriptBlocked) (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Table feedback (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Character Set Alias Matching (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Comparing conformance requirements against real-world docs (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: window.onerror initial value (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Lose Focus When Hidden? (SVG ISSUE-2031) (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: cloneNode() and script execution (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: several messages (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed amends to <small> element (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Placing elements in the HTML namespace (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed amends to <small> element (Thursday, 12 February)
• Change to AAA (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Fwd: table, tbody, tr (was : Rendering section feedback) (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: IE compat with coords parsing (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Conditional branch in tree builder based on DOM state (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Saturday, 7 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)
• Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)
• "downplayed errors" (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Implementation of head@profile (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Drop foster-parented stuff on the floor if parent gone (Sunday, 1 February)
• Floating point number feedback (Sunday, 1 February)

Ian Jacobs

• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)

Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa

• HTML 5 Spec, broken link (anchor) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)

James Craig

• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)

James Graham

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: table caption as a short description, @summary as a long description (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: Implementation of head@profile (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: revised table headers design is OK, right? (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Janina Sajka

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)

Jens Meiert

• Re: priority based loading of web page elements (Monday, 16 February)

Jim Jewett

• On subsetting the spec [was: Re: ACTION-95, ISSUE-65: Plan to publish a new WD of HTML-5] (Monday, 23 February)
• announce list [was: Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status]] (Monday, 16 February)

John Foliot - WATS.ca

• RE: disinterested chairing [was Re: summary="" in HTML5] (Friday, 27 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 25 February)
• RE: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Tuesday, 24 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Tuesday, 24 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Friday, 20 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)

Jon Barnett

• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)

Jon Gunderson

• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)

Jonas Sicking

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Drop foster-parented stuff on the floor if parent gone (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Spec license use cases - WG Decision on the Record? (Saturday, 14 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Friday, 6 February)

Joshue O Connor

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" and Universal Design in HTML5 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Caption and summary survey (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)

Julian Reschke

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• ISSUE-54, was: Input on the agenda (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)

Justin Anthony Knapp

• The status and compatibility of web standards (Thursday, 12 February)

Justin James

• RE: Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)

Karl Dubost

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Tuesday, 3 February)

L. David Baron

• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering: align=right and 'margin-right:auto' (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Rendering feedback (Monday, 2 February)

Lachlan Hunt

• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Rendering Margins and Padding (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Sunday, 1 February)
• [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Sunday, 1 February)

Larry Masinter

• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Review of xhtml-media-types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• RE: Implementation of head@profile (Friday, 13 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• RE: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• RE: Implementation of head@profile (Thursday, 5 February)
• Implementation of head@profile (Thursday, 5 February)
• head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• RE: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)
• table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)

Laura Carlson

• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 25 February)

Laurens Holst

• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 24 February)

Leif Halvard Silli

• Re: Draft text for summary attribute definition (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Caption and summary survey (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Friday, 20 February)
• Caption and summary survey (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: google supports rel="canonical" (ISSUE-27 rel-ownership) (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: table caption as a short description, @summary as a long description (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: alt / no alt / etc Re: "downplayed errors" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: [Bug 6543] New: Mint a new element for figure captions (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Wednesday, 4 February)
• [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: HTML is a declarative mark-up language (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Sunday, 1 February)

Maciej Stachowiak

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Saturday, 7 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (was: Re: Discussions with plh) (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Monday, 2 February)

Manu Sporny

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Mark Nottingham

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Matt Morgan-May

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)

Michael A. Puls II

• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)

Michael Cooper

• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Joint task force on ARIA user agent implementation (Monday, 9 February)

Michael(tm) Smith

• H:TML Status section updated [was: Moving forward on deciding] (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-02-26 (Thursday, 26 February)
• FW: [Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5] (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5 (Sunday, 15 February)

Murray Maloney

• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Monday, 2 February)

noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Olivier GENDRIN

• Re: R2866 : better talk about "CSS display" instead of "CSS tables" (Tuesday, 24 February)
• R2866 : better talk about "CSS display" instead of "CSS tables" (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: priority based loading of web page elements (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: a11y : cell headers order has to be consistent and ordered (was: revised table headers design is OK, right?) (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Fwd: table, tbody, tr (was : Rendering section feedback) (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering: default style for <figure> (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Rendering feedback (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Rendering feedback (Tuesday, 3 February)

Patrick H. Lauke

• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Proposed amends to <small> element (Thursday, 12 February)

Philip TAYLOR

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: DOM idiosyncracies and made-up tag names (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Monday, 2 February)

Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)

• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status] (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status] (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)

Philippe Le Hegaret

• Re: Charter (was: Re: Discussions with plh) (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (was: Re: Discussions with plh) (Tuesday, 3 February)

raghu bharat

• priority based loading of web page elements (Sunday, 15 February)

Rob Sayre

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: Dimension attributes and video (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Robert J Burns

• Re: Draft text for summary attribute definition (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: Draft text for summary attribute definition (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: disinterested chairing [was Re: summary="" in HTML5] (Friday, 27 February)
• disinterested chairing [was Re: summary="" in HTML5] (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: several messages (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• (no subject) (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Tuesday, 17 February)
• What's the problem with Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace? (Monday, 16 February)
• What's the problem with Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace? (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Sunday, 15 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: Proposed amends to <small> element (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: "downplayed errors" (Tuesday, 10 February)
• Re: [Bug 6543] New: Mint a new element for figure captions (Monday, 9 February)
• ISSUE-66 image analysis heuristics (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: Style sheet for W3C version of the spec (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)

Robin Berjon

• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)

Roy T. Fielding

• Re: fragid navigation and pct-encoded (Wednesday, 18 February)

Sailesh Panchang

• RE: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• RE: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• RE: summary="" in HTML5 (2 of 2) (Tuesday, 24 February)

Sam Ruby

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: Draft text for summary attribute definition (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Saturday, 28 February)
• Re: disinterested chairing [was Re: summary="" in HTML5] (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: FW: [Re: TR/web-forms-2 -> TR/html5] (Monday, 23 February)
• Entropy w.r.t. Namespace Discussion (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Reuse of 1999 XHTML namespace, text/html and application/xhtml+xml media types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• {agenda} HTML WG telcon 2009-02-19 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: google supports rel="canonical" (ISSUE-27 rel-ownership) (Wednesday, 18 February)
• WG Decision - spec license use cases (Tuesday, 17 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Monday, 16 February)
• Re: Spec license use cases - WG Decision on the Record? (Saturday, 14 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Thursday, 12 February)
• Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Design principles - building from justification (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute (Thursday, 5 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: table-summary argument (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Spec license (Tuesday, 3 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Discussions with plh (License) (Monday, 2 February)
• Discussions with plh [was: Moving Forward] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Sunday, 1 February)
• Re: Decision Policy [was: Intended Audience] (Sunday, 1 February)

Shane McCarron

• Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel (Friday, 27 February)

Simon Pieters

• Require quotes around attributes for more characters (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: [html5] proposal to add <text> element. (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Re: Rendering section feedback (Wednesday, 11 February)
• Rendering: default style for <figure> (Friday, 6 February)
• Re: Rendering: align=right and 'margin-right:auto' (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Rendering: align=right and 'margin-right:auto' (Wednesday, 4 February)
• Re: Rendering feedback (Monday, 2 February)
• Rendering feedback (Monday, 2 February)
• Re: [html-author] Updates to the HTML Reference (Monday, 2 February)

Smylers

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: publication decision [was: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status] (Saturday, 14 February)
• Re: simple shorthand syntax proposal (Thursday, 5 February)

Steve Axthelm

• Re: Caption@title instead of table@summary? (Friday, 20 February)

Steven Faulkner

• Draft text for summary attribute definition (Friday, 27 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Thursday, 26 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• another example canvas use- cufon - another accessibility concern and spec contradiction (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Monday, 23 February)
• Re: Caption and summary survey (Friday, 20 February)
• Re: Use and abuse of @summary (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Use and abuse of @summary (Wednesday, 18 February)
• table caption as a short description, @summary as a long description (Friday, 13 February)
• Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" (Thursday, 12 February)

William Loughborough

• Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 (Wednesday, 25 February)
• Re: summary="" in HTML5 (Tuesday, 24 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Saturday, 21 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Thursday, 19 February)
• Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns (Wednesday, 18 February)
• Re: details on report of PFWG HTML5 actions & issues status (Friday, 13 February)

Last message date: Saturday, 28 February 2009 23:34:03 UTC