W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: ISSUE 86 and removing atom transform section - focusing

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:09:00 -0500
Message-ID: <h2h643cc0271004161609s4d165226h3c470bed95629595@mail.gmail.com>
To: sroussey@network54.com
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Steven Roussey <sroussey@gmail.com> wrote:
> I still assert that using the html as a feed is a bad idea, regardless of
> any algorithm change:
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/0506.html
>
> Steven Roussey
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2010, at 2:34 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I object to summarily removing it.  If it does become an LC blocker,
>>> I'd support removing it; it'll remain the WHATWG version of the spec
>>> in any case.  I believe the issues with the algorithm are minor and
>>> can be resolved quickly, though.
>>
>> All right, let's see if we can come up with an algorithm change that no
>> one objects to, otherwise this issue may end up going to a poll and written
>> decision.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Maciej
>>
>>
>
>

I also object to keeping the section, and to continuing the discussion
on the algorithm until this higher level decision is made. If this
becomes a WhatWG thing, then it can be resolved in the WhatWG email
list. Or perhaps among the Atom community, who can provide assistance.

Shelley
Received on Friday, 16 April 2010 23:09:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:16 UTC