W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [CSSWG] Agenda conf call 29-feb-2012

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:01:46 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCDKCPCd4xcXFL=x0wwjV1MJTEmJVHs-inauZzcToD-kQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Daniel Glazman
<daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
> Le 29/02/12 17:46, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Daniel Glazman
>> <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 28/02/12 22:49, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> If we do, we should broaden it to all non-W3C references, like RFCs,
>>>> which we definitely refer to in some places.
>>>
>>> FIWI, RFCs are a bit different here: W3C does not have working groups
>>> on same topics and specs of same names...
>>
>> Irrelevant; the concern is with patents, not politics.
>
> Don't tell _me_ that. The CSS WG is still a W3C WG, and W3C does
> have some rules.

I don't think the W3C has any rule that says "Thou shalt not refer to
the WHATWG version of HTML." ^_^

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 17:02:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:51 GMT