- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:44:46 +0100
- To: "Dean Edridge" <dean@dean.org.nz>, "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:52:12 +0100, Dean Edridge <dean@dean.org.nz> wrote: > I have nothing at all against Mike being "pro-active" and putting some > thing together and publishing it, it's only the fact that it's been > published at, and endorsed by the W3C that bothers me, it's pretty hard > to argue against such a spec when it has already been published and > people have accepted that it's here for good. I explained this in detail > but I don't think you listen. In what way has it been published and endorsed by the W3C? It certainly does not look to be published and endorsed more than say when I first drafted the html5-diff document, on which the HTML WG had not made any decisions at that time either. (I'm not sure I agree with that the document should define things in a normative way, but I have a hard time seeing how anything Mike did here is wrong.) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 21 November 2008 10:45:48 UTC