- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 10:43:05 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9042 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |NEEDSINFO --- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-02-23 10:43:05 --- 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: Did Not Understand Request Change Description: no spec change Rationale: It's basically irrelevant, yeah... to the user, the <iframe> in this case doesn't really provide another document, it's just part of the parent document. It's not so much that the title inherits, so much as that the question of the title isn't really interesting in this case. I'm not really sure how to express this in the spec's tone... if you think it'd be useful information in the spec, do you have any suggestions for how to phrase it? (document.title returns the empty string, that's defined in the section on document.title, as for any document without a title element) -- 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 Tuesday, 23 February 2010 10:43:07 UTC