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

Re: Why I don't attend the weekly teleconference (Was: Input on the agenda)

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:13:13 +0100
Message-Id: <p06240840c66f784cf28e@[17.202.35.52]>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
At 11:17  -0500 29/06/09, Shelley Powers wrote:
>  >> Wouldn't another set of actions be a stronger clarification in the
>>>  HTML 5 specification about how the attribute is to be used? Isn't that
>>>  just as viable an action to take based on the concern?
>>
>  > If the hypothesis is that summary is "irrecoverably polluted", 
>which is what
>>  I wrote, then clarification of how we'd hoped it would have been used
>>  instead, is rather backwards-looking, isn't it?
>>
>
>But can't we make the same claim about most of the web, and hence most
>web elements? After all, HTML tables are "irrecoverably polluted" if
>one examines the data that Philip derived.

No, by "irrecoverably polluted" I mean a state in which the useless 
so dramatically outnumbers the useful that no-one bothers to use the 
facility in question any more, since they have no expectation of 
finding anything useful.

A close analogy would be email without spam filters;  if I got of the 
order of 5,000 emails a week and had to sift those for the 5 or so 
that are 'real', I might not bother.  (Yes, one of my accounts is 
that low-volume, as it happens, but it also has an excellent ISP spam 
filter, happily).


-- 
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 08:14:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:39 GMT