- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 23:59:58 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10068 --- Comment #27 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-08-16 23:59:57 --- (In reply to comment #25) > 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: <noscript> is indeed blunt, but it still serves a valid purpose. > What problem does making it obsolete solve? What is the valid purpose that noscript provides? Your rationale didn't provide this. -- 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 Monday, 16 August 2010 23:59:59 UTC