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

Re: Proposal to make Content-Language pragma non-conforming altogether for ISSUE-88 (mark I)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 17:40:01 +0900
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.vbw00zsw64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 17:34:38 +0900, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  
> On 29.04.2010 10:26, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> ...
>> To be clear: are you saying you object to the I18N WG's preferred
>> resolution? If so, we will likely take this issue to a survey.
>> ...
> Yes. It's not the HTML spec's job to restrict the contents of what can  
> go into meta/@http-equiv; in particular to make it's use non-conforming.

I still don't understand why you think that is so. Servers never  
implemented the feature (and it was intended for them). User agents ended  
up implementing the feature in limited fashion. What is the problem with  
writing this down?

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 08:41:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:01 UTC