- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 19:05:31 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10879 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |ian@hixie.ch Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-09-30 19:05:31 UTC --- 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: It's a SHOULD because it is possible to make serious inroads into implementing this requirement, it's just that there are always going to be limits to how far one can go. For example, one could execute the page and spam the page with user interaction events, while monitoring the DOM for validity. However, if a bug occurs only with particular combinations of values, it's possible that the failure case will never be reached. So in conclusion, I think "SHOULD" is actually appropriate here, even if, as the spec says, it's impossible to do a perfect job. -- 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 Thursday, 30 September 2010 19:05:36 UTC