- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 01:20:04 +0000
- To: public-i18n-cjk@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10830 --- Comment #33 from Murata <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> 2011-08-22 01:19:59 UTC --- > Completely broken code is a good description of 99% of the web. But sure, try.. I do not understand your argument. Why can behaviour for broken code be a reason to drop rb? "HTML Working Group Decision Policy" document" has a para shown below: I strongly think that "If the commenter is dissatisfied with the resolution and does not believe it is productive to ask the editor to reconsider, he or she may ask to escalate the issue to the issue tracker. " I would like to request the WG to consider (1) dropping dt of dl, (2) introducing rb, and (3) providing convincing argument for keeping dt whild turning down rb in spite of repeated requests from I18N and Japan. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You reported the bug.
Received on Monday, 22 August 2011 01:21:19 UTC