Sam Ruby, Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:30:03 -0400: > On 03/19/2011 12:19 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> >> Options which could make the situation simpler: > > If you have new information to present, please consider taking the > steps which are described here: > > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11447#c3 Since we took the poll, diminishing the difference between XML and HTML5 has gotten higher on my priority list. And, this decision *does* take a step in that direction. Given that we have taken that step, we should perhaps go the line out. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that a change to the language determination algorithm would be another issue than the particular conformance requirement that we now have decided upon. Likewise, making html@lang obligatory would also be another issue, it seems. (I guess, if included in the change proposals that we voted on, then such options *could* have been part of the ISSUE-88, but in fact, they weren't.) -- leif halvard silliReceived on Saturday, 19 March 2011 17:02:35 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 19 March 2011 17:02:35 GMT