- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 11:04:18 +0100
- To: www-html@w3.org
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > The burden of proof is on the ones making the claim. The claim is that I thought the claim was that fixing the meanings of some classes would be beneficial and wouldn't break existing content. > predefined classes create real, practical problems. Prove it! I.E. your position is the first move away from the status quo ante. > > Some of the classes were chosen because they are widely used. We have > statistics to show that, for example, copyright is the 9th most widely Copyright is also probably one of the least understood concepts on the web. In particular, people do not understand the distinction between the claim of ownership and date of first publication, as against the licence to use the material (even licence often really means contract). I also know cases where people are instructed to put just "Copyright 200x", with no owner, in the copyright meta data (in this case .NET). If you want an example, choose one whose scope people really do understand.
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 10:04:43 UTC