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

Re: <keygen> element

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:20:46 +0200
Message-ID: <4AA281CE.7050800@gmx.de>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...
> The key point isn't "somewhere else" but optional.  If <keygen> were 
> defined separately but normatively referenced in a way that was still 
> mandatory, the document would still not reflect reality.
> ...

Agreed.

> Nobody is suggesting that keygen should not be documented at all.
> 
> The current draft indicates that keygen support is required.  That is 
> the part that is controversial.
> 
> By Last Call, we need to have consensus on this issue.
> ...

Agreed as well. And on many more.

BR, Julian
Received on Saturday, 5 September 2009 15:21:37 GMT

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