W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2012

Re: Getting HTML5 to Recommendation in 2014

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 08:14:17 -0400
Message-ID: <505B0899.8060001@intertwingly.net>
To: Ian Devlin <ian@iandevlin.com>
CC: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
On 09/20/2012 05:15 AM, Ian Devlin wrote:
> Yes, good call. Definitely need qualification on that point.

Indeed, good catch.  This will need to be revised to indicate that 
pubdate can be pursued as an extension specification.

- Sam Ruby

> On 20 September 2012 11:04, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com
> <mailto:philipj@opera.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 22:33:55 +0200, Paul Cotton
>     <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com <mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>> wrote:
>
>         [1]
>         http://dev.w3.org/html5/__decision-policy/html5-2014-__plan.html
>         <http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/html5-2014-plan.html>
>
>
>     The section on "185 drop pubdate attribute" says "Retain the current
>     pubdate attribute in the spec. Identify it as an at risk feature."
>     Is this a typo or misunderstanding, given that the spec currently
>     doesn't include pubdate on the <time> element?
>
>     --
>     Philip Jägenstedt
>     Core Developer
>     Opera Software
>
>
>
>
> --
> ian devlin
> e: ian@iandevlin.com <mailto:ian@iandevlin.com>
> w: www.iandevlin.com <http://www.iandevlin.com>
> t: @iandevlin <http://www.twitter.com/iandevlin>
> skype: idevlin
>
> buy my book: html5 multimedia: develop and design
> <http://html5multimedia.com>
>
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2012 12:14:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2012 12:14:45 GMT