W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > March 2014

Re: ISSUE-151: whatwg-references - Decision

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 09:36:02 -0600
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+dLKZUZ2T07cmWQCTEgYG0Y-8qWcj8TKmWSAcZqHb5nig@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> wrote:

> On 27/03/2014 15:27 , Glenn Adams wrote:
>
>> Is there a need to say anything about the WHATWG in the SotD section? I
>> would prefer nothing be said there.
>>
>
> The WHATWG is the reason we have this document today and continues to be
> the major driving force behind it. Not at the very least mentioning it
> would be, in my opinion, very much disingenuous.
>
> In the interest of actually shipping, can we please stay away from
> preferences and stick to things that cause actual problems? I, and I
> believe the other editors, would be very thankful.


Well, you dismissed my claim of potential confusion, so I offered a way out
(remove WHATWG references). I believe the current language is an actual
problem, so I'll file a bug report (shortly) to that effect with additional
details.


>
>
> --
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
>
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2014 15:36:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:57:26 UTC