- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:45:04 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14363 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ian@hixie.ch Summary|Section 4.2.5.2 appears to |Update the registration |be saying that conformance |mechanisms |checkers must obtain the | |list of valid meta names by | |screen-scraping a public | |wiki? *Seriously*? That's a | |joke, right? | Status Whiteboard| |reg Severity|normal |trivial --- Comment #2 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-10-03 18:45:02 UTC --- Not a joke, no. It's in fact the same mechanism as the HTML working group agreed to use for rel="" values. Welcome to the new Web. The exact mechanism needs work, but it's not a big problem. (In reply to comment #1) > > If I show it to a few of my friends via an IRC chat at 2:00 AM, and they all > agree that it looks good, does that constitute a wide peer review? Can I then > claim my newly minted metadata name Ratified? Certainly within that community you should be able to use it, sure. That's always been the way Web standards work. If you have a community who want to do something, you just write a spec and agree to it and then within that community, that's how the technology works. The HTML spec actually calls that out explicitly; see the last few paragraphs of the "Extensibility" section. -- 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, 3 October 2011 18:45:10 UTC