Re: REVERT REQUEST for "crossorigin" attribute

On 6/23/11 1:38 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> So can we please be frank about the fact that *this* LC really is a
> request for wider review, and that there really is no doubt that there
> will be another LC?

A new LC is required if any substantive change needs to be made to the 
spec in response to LC feedback, no?  Not just a new feature; any 
significant change.

Given that, how could there possibly be doubt that there will be another 
LC, unless we expect people to not actually read the spec during this 
LC?  (Note that this is actually not and unreasonable expectation, given 
the spec's size and the difficulty of actually understanding how the 
parts fit together.)

-Boris

Received on Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:15:51 UTC