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

Re: BUG 8818 - lack of rationale

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 04:29:29 -0800
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <4061D4F1-392F-43D1-B7BB-AB84977862BB@apple.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelleypowers@burningbird.net>

On Feb 13, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:

> Ian marked bug 8818 as WONTFIX, with the following:
>
> "EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If  
> you are
> satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to  
> CLOSED. If
> you have additional information and would like the editor to  
> reconsider, please
> reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full  
> HTML
> Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug,  
> and suggest
> title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker  
> issue
> yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this  
> document:
>  http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
>
> Status: Rejected
> Change Description: no spec change
> Rationale: I'm happy to remove this attribute from the W3C HTML5  
> specification
> if that's what the working group wants. The last time I removed a  
> feature based
> on a bug report such as this, I started a minor war, however, so I  
> suggest that
> you raise this via the change proposal process if you really feel  
> this way."
>
>
> I do not consider this to be a good rationale.

I agree that this is not a proper rationale. The rationale should  
state at least one positive reason for srcdoc. It would be ok to quote  
it from one of the many email messages on the topic.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Sunday, 14 February 2010 12:30:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:01 GMT