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

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

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:52:03 +0200
Message-ID: <4A9F75A3.6050200@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> ...
>>> what features are lacking these requirements?
>> I will look for more, but for now, let's just get those two attributes 
>> defined.
> 
> Which two attributes? I'm not aware of anything that's lacking suitable 
> conformance criteria. Since I fixed <head profile> and <meta scheme>, I've 
> not heard anyone list for any other features that need work.

Are you referring to:

"User agents should ignore the profile content attribute on head elements.

When the attribute would be used as a globally unique name, the user 
agent should instead always assume that all known profiles apply to all 
pages, and should therefore apply the conventions of all known metadata 
profiles to the document.

When the attribute's value would be handled as a URL and dereferenced, 
the user agent may resolve the attribute's value, and if that is 
successful, may then fetch the resulting absolute URL and apply the 
appropriate processing.

The profile IDL attribute of the head element must reflect the content 
attribute of the same name."

?

That's not a definition of what head/@profile is. Sorry.

And it's incorrect in that it talks about a single URI, not a set of URIs.

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 07:52:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:48 GMT