- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:34:48 +0000
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Cc: robert@ocallahan.org, public-html-admin@w3.org, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Hi Chairs, I am not religious and so I find Robert's religious strap lines a little funky, but am in no way offended by them, but I do find glens response offensive and unnecessary in tone and substance and the sort of interaction that should not be tolerated on this mailing list. regards SteveF Glen adams wrote: >> Rob >> -- >> Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave — just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” [Matthew 20:25-28] > > > > Can you keep this religious rubbish off of this technical mail list please. Go to church if you want to talk to your god. On 31 January 2013 03:27, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: >>> >>> So, you want to insist on a higher bar for CDMs than other modularizable >>> components? For example, there are no similar requirements for things like: >>> >>> uri scheme/url protocol handlers >>> image decoders >>> video decoders >>> audio decoders >>> font decoders >> >> >> I do expect URIs, image, media and font formats used on the Web to be >> fully specified somewhere, and that is standard practice today. > > > And CDMs will be fully specified somewhere as well. > >> >> >>> input method editors >>> geolocation devices >> >> >> These do not affect interop. > > > Yes they do. > >>> >>> While it is reasonable to define a voluntary registry, it is not >>> reasonable to require registration or to require that documentation be fully >>> open. Who would enforce this even if it were defined? >> >> >> Whoever maintains the registry. > > > No registry I'm aware of does such a thing. You are naive to believe it > feasible. > >> >> >>> It is reasonable for particular UA vendors to impose their own business >>> requirements on integrable components. It is not reasonable to dictate that >>> all UAs follow the same policy. >> >> >> It is reasonable for the W3C to impose requirements on its own >> specifications in order to maximise interoperability. Vendors who don't like >> are not required to participate. > > > You are wrong. It is not the role of the W3C to dictate the uses of its > specifications. > > >> >> Rob >> -- >> Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the >> Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over >> them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must >> be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave — just as >> the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life >> as a ransom for many.” [Matthew 20:25-28] > > > Can you keep this religious rubbish off of this technical mail list please. > Go to church if you want to talk to your god. > >
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 07:35:57 UTC