- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:37:45 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8623 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |NEEDSINFO --- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-01-11 11:37:44 --- 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: The spec already goes to great lengths along these lines. Here are some quotes regarding this: "Authors must not use elements, attributes, or attribute values for purposes other than their appropriate intended semantic purpose." "Documents that use style attributes on any of their elements must still be comprehensible and usable if those attributes were removed." "In particular, using the style attribute to hide and show content, or to convey meaning that is otherwise not included in the document, is non-conforming. (To hide and show content, use the hidden attribute.)" "Authors are also encouraged to make their applications degrade gracefully in the absence of scripting support." I can add more, though, if you think that would be helpful. What exactly do you think the spec should say that it doesn't already say? -- 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, 11 January 2010 11:37:46 UTC