- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 21:00:45 +0200
- To: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com> wrote: > I guess I was approaching it from the perspective that implementing observability requires extra work, and so calling that out as an attribute makes most sense. That is a somewhat implementer-ey perspective, though. Given that it would be new and actually does require work as well as some specification work (in terms of task scheduling) calling it out seems most appropriate to me. We can always flip it later if it turns out we are adding this all over. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2014 19:01:16 UTC