- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:13:12 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8000 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2009-10-23 06:13:12 --- EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: I concurr with Thomas in this e-mail: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Oct/0707.html It seems to me that we _should_ be calling authors out on this kind of mistake. Just because people do something doesn't mean we should make it valid — after all, we made <font> invalid, along with many other things. Conformance is about trying to advise authors to do the right thing. I have added text to the spec that encourages conformance checkers to be very careful about how they complain about these issues, by the way, so that authors aren't encouraged to remove ARIA support but are instead encouraged to use the right elements. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 23 October 2009 06:18:06 UTC