- From: Dailey, David P. <david.dailey@sru.edu>
- Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 22:37:15 -0400
- To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: <public-html@w3c.org>
Hi Maciej. +1 <paraphrase>Let's flesh out our consensual goals</paraphrase> Sun 4/1/2007 6:30 PM Maciej Stachowiak wrote >I snipped the rest of your message because I'm not sure what it means. Thanks. If you can snip the rest of the obscure things I am likely to write before I have a chance to actually write them, this will be even better. And to continue in this spirit of friendly revision, I'll quote you all-out-of-sequence. I hope I can do as much justice to what you've written as you have for me. Please fuss, if not. >This is why I tried to record what I think are the implicit design rules followed by the WHATWG community, as a starting point to consensus on goals. Many of these goals are also directly related to our charter requirements. I concur. Many do relate directly to the charter requirements. >Why Have Design Principles? Being very <euphemism>seasoned</euphemism> I have on occasion seen "first principles" laid down, ostensibly to flesh out a committee's charge or charter, but later, to be used to further some hidden agenda. In the case of WHATWG, however, the agenda and its rationale are all quite "unhidden", so my concern here is largely academic or perhaps procedural. >The intent for these principles is that they are pragmatic rules of thumb that must be balanced against each other, not that they have some mystical significance. Okay... quoting Barbosa, then: "it's more of a guideline than an actual 'code' ..." I'm cool with that. Thanks for a well-reasoned reply. regards, David <![off-the-record[why not reinvent the wheel? http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ReuleauxTriangle.html//]]>
Received on Monday, 2 April 2007 02:37:09 UTC