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

Re: ISSUES 90, 91, 93, 96, 97 -- if you support these change proposals

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:53:25 -0500
Message-ID: <q2u1c8dbcaa1004291253w6ea19961w9f15a8eadea670f4@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Jonas,

> I'll also note that I haven't yet heard anyone representing a browser
> developer arguing against these elements. I would further assume that
> no browser developer is going to argue for putting features in the
> spec that they don't intend to implement.

Ian once explained his nine step procedure [1] for adding new features
to the spec.

He concluded by saying that the default state for a feature request is
for it to be rejected and the default state for a section of the spec
was for it to be eventually dropped unless the feature is widely
implemented and so important that browser vendors "are actually ready
to commit money and risk interop issues over it".

Are these elements widely implemented?

Are they so important that browser vendors are actually ready to
commit money and risk interop issues over them?

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Laura

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jun/0140.html

-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 19:53:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:17 UTC