- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 06:49:50 -0400
- To: "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>
- CC: public-html-admin@w3.org
On 09/21/2013 12:56 AM, Jens O. Meiert wrote: > Thanks for clarifying, Steve (also Robin and Sam). I’ll look for the > <cite> discussion and may follow up again on public-html-admin@. Technical discussions (for example, how should the description of the <cite> element be changed?) are welcome on public-html. Process discussions (for example, how can the HTML WG and WHATWG coordinate better) are welcome on public-html-admin. Meanwhile, I've cloned the following bugs: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23008 => https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23313 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23175 => https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23314 https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22996 => https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23315 Two possible outcomes here. Most likely, the specs are evolving at a different rates. Less likely, but does occur, the HTML WG and WHATWG come to different conclusions; these cases generally don't affect browser behavior. I will state that the HTML WG editors aggressively "cherry pick" changes from the WHATWG specification. - Sam Ruby
Received on Saturday, 21 September 2013 10:50:21 UTC