- 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