- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:23:56 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, robert@ocallahan.org, public-html-admin@w3.org, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
+1 to Steve. Some use e-mail signatures. Some don't. Some fill them with religion. Some fill them with some variant of the opposite. A conforming e-mail program would as well *display* a signature as a signature. In the e-mail programs I have used, that means that its text is displayed in gray, slightly hard to read, color. Plus that the program doesn't quote the signature, in replies. *That* is technical. Leif H Silli Steve Faulkner, Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:34:48 +0000: > 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 08:24:28 UTC