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

Re: Differences between the W3C and WHATWG specifications

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:04:23 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTim_HeoEK6nBFeJIIyOQTstRjAjRq9n6COjVcVFu@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
2010/6/13 Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>:
> Adam Barth, Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:00:18 -0700:
>> 2010/6/12 Leif Halvard Silli :
>>> Ian Hickson, Sat, 12 Jun 2010 17:08:54 +0000 (UTC):
>>>  […]
>>>> The WHATWG draft continues to exist because it's the
>>>> only way to have a specification that actually makes
>>>> sense in the face of the ridiculous decisions you keep making.
>>>  […]
>>>
>>> Thanks for relaying to us that
>>>
>>> (1)  you've considered making the WHATwg copy cease to exist, and
>>> (2)  that its existence isn't related to "a much better license".
>>
>> I don't think either of those conclusions follow from what Ian wrote.
>
> Regarding (1), then he underlined the opposite possibility as well:
>
> ]] -- I've no idea what we'll do if you make a decision on an issue of
> normative relevance, like many of the issues that you keep pushing back
> and not resolving. [[

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions based on very little data.
I'm not sure Ian is empowered to make the W3C copy cease to exist.

Adam
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 02:05:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:18 UTC