- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 23:37:35 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11107 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |NEEDSINFO --- Comment #2 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-01-11 23:37:34 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: In response to another bug I made it clear that the date picker doesn't need to expose the ISO date format, since that has been a source of confusion. I haven't seen confusion about the other point. See comment 1, though. While implementations are still new, I think we should avoid having examples. However, if people want examples, and can provide images that show excellent designs (and that would thus at least bias implementations in a positive way), reopen the bug and I'll add them. I'm no UI guy. Marking NEEDSINFO since we need images to proceed. -- 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, 11 January 2011 23:37:37 UTC