- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 15:58:21 -0400
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- CC: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 05/07/2012 01:21 PM, Laura Carlson wrote: > > I may be forced to revert my CP withdrawal > and pursue my document further. I encourage you to read the meeting minutes. In particular, I'll highlight that material that I think you should focus on. There likely would be a strong objection to Cynthia's and (and possibly your) proposal(s): http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20120505#l-142 The basis of this was a statement that the spec text as drafted would specifically preclude UAs (including browsers) from ever giving a better experience: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20120504#l-2920 On the other hand, there didn't seem to be anybody in the room opposed to giving authors strong guidance that they can't depend on such behavior, e.g.: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20120504#l-2903 At this point, I'm not suggesting any specific action, other than reviewing this discussion. You are welcome to re-propose your proposal, with or without change. Just be aware that not making a change in response to what may turn out to be a strong objection could negatively affect the chances of your proposal being selected. - Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 19:58:55 UTC