On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>wrote: > +1 I don't have any issue with the text as written, although I am sure it > could be improved, but such improvement would be imperceptible to the vast > majority of readers and therefore not worth wasting cycles on. > I would venture that the readers that matter in the current context are W3C Members who will respond to calls for PR. If a simple improvement will satisfy the stated concern, then it's worth making the effort. > > -- > > Regards > > SteveF > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> > > > On 27 March 2014 15:31, 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. >> >> >> -- >> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2014 15:42:58 UTC