- 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