- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 20:32:27 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11169 Boyd Waters <waters.boyd@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Boyd Waters <waters.boyd@gmail.com> 2010-12-04 20:32:27 UTC --- I think I understand: processors cannot be required to know that they are processing HTML5, or it is awful to contemplate adding special processing modes to processors. I like the idea of an RDFa processor knowing enough to understand time's @datetime property, and there is nothing it the specification that prevents an implementation that does this. I think that everyone will understand why markup such as <time datetime="2010-10-29" property="dc:modified" content="2007-01-01"> is likely to confuse people and should be avoided. The same can be said of markup such as <time datetime="2010-10-29">December 31 1969</time> -- perfectly valid, and a formal spec for XML should not be distorted in an attempt to avoid such. Thanks for looking at 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 Saturday, 4 December 2010 20:32:28 UTC