public-html@w3.org from April 2007 by author

Alexander Graf

• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Friday, 20 April)
• Update on affiliation (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)
• Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)

Alexey Feldgendler

• Re: Posting to this list (Monday, 2 April)

Alfonso Martínez de Lizarrondo

• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)

Andrew Fedoniouk

• Re: Canvas (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Canvas (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)

Andrew Sidwell

• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)

Andrew Stibbard

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)

Andy Hume

• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Friday, 6 April)

Anne van Kesteren

• Re: Meta-question : why so few "Re: " subjects ? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Design principles: added three examples (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Thursday, 26 April)
• About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: HTML/XHTML (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: denying users direct access to document source (Friday, 13 April)
• Microsoft versioning proposal (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Canvas (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• beforeprint event (was: Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated ("don't break the web" vs respecting MIME types) (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: deprecate HR; replace with LS (logical seperator) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)

Ariel Perez

• Re: Non-goal for HTML: A Graphics API (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: wg members status (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)

Arthur Jennings

• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Asbjørn Ulsberg

• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Versioning of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Versioning of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)
• Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: Doctypes and the dialects of HTML 5 (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: Multipart response support (Sunday, 1 April)

aurélien levy

• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)

Ben Adida

• RDFa Use Cases and Primer Working Drafts - Comments Welcome! (Tuesday, 17 April)

Ben Meadowcroft

• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)

Ben Ward

• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)

ben@hedrington.com

• Re: RDFa Use Cases and Primer Working Drafts - Comments Welcome! (Tuesday, 17 April)

Benjamin Chait

• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Current working draft (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Opt-in solutions ...and problems (was Re: Versioning and html[5]) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Bring back <ol start="N"> in Strict mode (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)

Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis

• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 12 April)

Benjamin West

• Re: survey of top web sites (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)

bhopgood@brookes.ac.uk

• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)

Bill Mason

• Re: Feature Strings (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)

Boris Zbarsky

• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)

Brad Fults

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: HTML5 vs HTML6 (Wednesday, 4 April)

Brian Suda

• Re: no HTML WG meeting around XTech (Tuesday, 3 April)

Bruce Boughton

• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: special immediate form: TREE special immediate form: TREE special immediate form: TREE (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: small consultation (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Opt-in solutions ...and problems (was Re: Versioning and html[5]) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)

Bruce Lawson

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)

cadunn

• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Cameron McCormack

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)

Carol King

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Charles Hinshaw

• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)

Charles McCathieNevile

• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Eolas vs. <object> (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)

Charles Ying

• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)

Chasen Le Hara

• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)

Chris Wilson

• RE: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Friday, 27 April)
• RE: HTML5 proposal response (Monday, 23 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• HTML5 proposal response (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Microsoft versioning proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: Microsoft versioning proposal (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• oops (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Patents and public (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Patents and public (was: RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Patents and public (was: RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• RE: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• RE: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: CSS for print (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Version information (was Re: HTML5 vs HTML6) (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: semantics [was Re: Proposed Design Principles updated] (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: HTML5 vs HTML6 (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: Proposed Design Principles updated ("don't break the web" vs respecting MIME types) (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Wednesday, 4 April)

Christian Schmidt

• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Thursday, 19 April)

Craig Saila

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Dailey, David P.

• RE: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Another look at the Proposed Design Principles (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Proposed requirement: specification should provide enough detail to handle Web content (Friday, 27 April)
• RE: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Friday, 27 April)
• RE: survey of top web sites (Friday, 27 April)
• RE: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: Proposed Design Principles review (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• RE: HTML5 proposal response (Friday, 20 April)
• specification name [was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5] (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: Eolas vs. <object> (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Current working draft (Saturday, 14 April)
• Aphorisms of First Principle [was Proposed Design Principles] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: innerHTML and setTimeout (Tuesday, 10 April)
• <table> terse mode for data entry (Sunday, 8 April)
• RE: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Sunday, 8 April)
• Canvas [was RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group] (Sunday, 8 April)
• RE: <table type="rowsortable"> (Sunday, 8 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: GIF was -- Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• semantics [was Re: Proposed Design Principles updated] (Wednesday, 4 April)
• RE: Why Have Design Principles? (was Re: Design Principles Document update) (Monday, 2 April)

Dan Connolly

• HTML5 as our specification text for review? (formal question WBS survey) (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed requirement: specification should provide enough detail to handle Web content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)
• HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• scribe for today's teleconference? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Let use this convention for conversation (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: agenda: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26T17:00:00Z (invited participants) (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: agenda: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26T17:00:00Z (Wednesday, 25 April)
• agenda: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26T17:00:00Z (Wednesday, 25 April)
• HTML version issue summary? (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: FAQ on joining the HTML WG as an Invited Expert (Tuesday, 24 April)
• survey of top web sites (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Other roles we should fill (survey on tasks and roles) (Tuesday, 24 April)
• FAQ on joining the HTML WG as an Invited Expert (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference Thu 26 Apr 1700UTC (meeting call, survey) (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference Thu 26 Apr 1700UTC (meeting call, survey) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• RE: quality of authoring tools' output (was Versioning and html[5]) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• supplemental HTML WG orientation teleconference (same survey) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• HTML WG teleconference Thu 26 Apr 1700UTC (meeting call, survey) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• taking threads to www-archive or offline altogether (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (patent policy FAQ)) (Thursday, 12 April)
• splitting HTML5 into chunks [was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Care with subject lines and threads [was: Proposal to Adopt ...] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated ("don't break the web" vs respecting MIME types) (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• no HTML WG meeting around XTech (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)

Daniel Glazman

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Hand-coding HTML (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: HTML5 proposal response (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 23 April)
• regrets (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: semantics [was Re: Proposed Design Principles updated] (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)

Daniel Schattenkirchner

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Thursday, 5 April)

Daniel Spång

• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Thursday, 26 April)

Dannii

• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Microsoft versioning proposal (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Microsoft versioning proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)

Dao Gottwald

• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: beforeprint event (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Canvas (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: rel=noreferrer (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Version information (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)

Dave Raggett

• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Friday, 27 April)
• Dublin workshop on web authoring (Thursday, 26 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: CSS for print (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Friday, 6 April)
• Links to DOM Ranges (was Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML) (Wednesday, 4 April)

David Dailey

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: task list (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: FAQ on joining the HTML WG as an Invited Expert (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: RDFa Use Cases and Primer Working Drafts - Comments Welcome! (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Aphorisms of First Principle [was Proposed Design Principles] (Monday, 16 April)
• usability testing [was: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: brainstorm: lines and existing html-elements (Wednesday, 11 April)
• access to client-side files [was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• style.background rendering - browser inconsistency (Tuesday, 3 April)

David Hyatt

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)

David Håsäther

• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 11 April)

David McFarland

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Davide Oliva

• Re: wg members status (Thursday, 12 April)

Debi Orton

• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)

Denis Boudreau (WebConforme)

• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)

deres

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Dmitry Turin

• Re[2]: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: Re[2]: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: Re[2]: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re[2]: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re[4]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re[2]: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• INPUT-PIC form control (Thursday, 26 April)
• Let use this convention for conversation (Thursday, 26 April)
• Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Fwd: Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Fwd: Re[4]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re[4]: new form control (Tuesday, 24 April)
• brainstorm: attributes as virtual tags (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Now there is table-element with predetermined quantity of column. (Monday, 23 April)
• new form control (Friday, 20 April)
• static and dinamic schemes (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: New discussion group are need (Friday, 13 April)
• New discussion group are need (Friday, 13 April)
• Re[2]: special immediate form: TREE (Friday, 13 April)
• special immediate form: SELECT (LOOKER) (Friday, 13 April)
• special immediate form: TREE special immediate form: TREE special immediate form: TREE (Friday, 13 April)
• small consultation (Friday, 13 April)
• Mask in string of address (Friday, 13 April)
• are necessary tag PACK ? (Friday, 13 April)
• Re[2]: brainstorm: repeating form controls (Thursday, 12 April)
• brainstorm: lines and existing html-elements (Wednesday, 11 April)
• brainstorm: alternative form controls (Monday, 9 April)
• brainstorm: repeating form controls (Monday, 9 April)

Doug Jones

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Monday, 9 April)
• HTML WG Glossary (Sunday, 8 April)

Doug Schepers

• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Issue Tracking (was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Canvas (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Canvas (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Canvas (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Posting to this list (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: Doctypes and the dialects of HTML 5 (Sunday, 1 April)

Dylan Smith

• Re: Hand-coding HTML (was: New html-element: table3) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (small) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Thursday, 12 April)

Dão Gottwald

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: brainstorm: attributes as virtual tags (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: brainstorm: attributes as virtual tags (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Now there is table-element with predetermined quantity of column. But sometimes we need to visualize three tables (for example, database tables) as one table: first table contains names of rows, second table contains names of columns (this table (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Issue Tracking (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: new form control (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: new form control (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Editor and authors (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: quality of authoring tools' output (was Versioning and html[5]) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Microsoft versioning proposal (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: RDFa Use Cases and Primer Working Drafts - Comments Welcome! (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Opt-in solutions ...and problems (was Re: Versioning and html[5]) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)

Edward O'Connor

• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)

Elliott Sprehn

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: quality of authoring tools' output (was Versioning and html[5]) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: <table> terse mode for data entry (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Why <video>? (was Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: style.background rendering - browser inconsistency (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: style.background rendering - browser inconsistency (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)

Eric Daspet

• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)

Espen Antonsen - 24SevenOffice

• RE:Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)

Gareth Hay

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)

Geoffrey Sneddon

• Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Giovanni Gentili

• HTML5 vs HTML6 (Tuesday, 3 April)

Gregory J. Rosmaita

• Re: agenda: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26T17:00:00Z (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• denying users direct access to document source (Friday, 13 April)
• User Agent (browser) WG at W3C [was: New discussion group are need] (Friday, 13 April)
• argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Monday, 2 April)
• deprecate HR; replace with LS (logical seperator) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• abbreviations in canonical HTML (thoughts & concrete suggestions) (Monday, 2 April)

Henk-Jan de Boer

• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)

Henri Sivonen

• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• BoF at XTech (was: Re: no HTML WG meeting around XTech) (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Editor and authors (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Precision of <canvas> rendering (was: Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: HTML/XHTML (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Design Principles updated (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Design Principles updated (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: brainstorm: repeating form controls (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: no HTML WG meeting around XTech (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Bring back <ol start="N"> in Strict mode (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Bring back <ol start="N"> in Strict mode (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Superstructure markup (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Doctypes and the dialects of HTML 5 (Sunday, 1 April)

Henrik Dvergsdal

• Re: Editor and authors (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Perception of HTML5 (was Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Perception of HTML5 (was Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Perception of HTML5 (was Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 13 April)
• Deviance from SGML (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Overall strategy (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Overall strategy (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)

html60.narod.ru

• New widget: picture (Monday, 2 April)
• New widget: picture (Monday, 2 April)
• New widget: picture (Monday, 2 April)

Håkon Wium Lie

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: CSS for print (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: CSS for print (Friday, 6 April)
• CSS for print (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Thursday, 5 April)

Ian Hickson

• Re: Proposed requirement: specification should provide enough detail to handle Web content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Thursday, 26 April)
• Proposed Design Principles review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: HTML5 proposal response (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: HTML5 proposal response (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference Thu 26 Apr 1700UTC (meeting call, survey) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: several messages on versioning (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Deviance from SGML (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• <object> attributes (Was: Versioning and html[5]) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Organization Weakness Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Overall strategy (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Version information (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• RE: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• RE: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)

James Graham

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Editor and authors (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: New discussion group are need (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)

Jason A. Lefkowitz

• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)

Jeff Cutsinger

• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)

Jeff Schiller

• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Thursday, 19 April)
• Feature Strings (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Eolas vs. <object> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: style.background rendering - browser inconsistency (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)

Jirka Kosek

• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)

Joe D'Andrea

• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)

John Boyer

• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [XBL Primer] new scenarios (Tuesday, 17 April)

John McKenzie

• Re: abbreviations in canonical HTML (thoughts & concrete suggestions) (Tuesday, 10 April)

Jonas Sicking

• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Let use this convention for conversation (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Now there is table-element with predetermined quantity of column.But sometimes we need to visualize three tables(for example, database tables) as one table:first table contains names of rows,second table contains names of columns (this table determine quantity of columns),third table contains data.New html-element: table-dim (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: A Concrete Example for the HTML Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Tuesday, 17 April)

Josef Spillner

• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Josh Sled

• RE: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Friday, 27 April)

Julian Reschke

• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)

Kai Hendry

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Karl Dubost

• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (was: Re: no HTML WG meeting around XTech) (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Editor and authors Re: HTML5 proposal response (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Eolas vs. <object> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Organization Weakness Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Thursday, 12 April)
• Canvas testing Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Canvas (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• [admin] switch to monthly archives (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)

Kempen, E.J.F. van

• RE: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)

Kornel Lesinski

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: new form control (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Re[2]: new form control (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: new form control (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• How frozen is frozen? (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)

L. David Baron

• Proposed requirement: specification should provide enough detail to handle Web content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference Thu 26 Apr 1700UTC (meeting call, survey) (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Version information (was Re: HTML5 vs HTML6) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)

Lachlan Hunt

• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)
• Re: E-mail subscription and RSS (Sunday, 1 April)

Laurens Holst

• Desing principles - Support World Languages example added (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Eolas vs. <object> (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Mask in string of address (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Design Principles updated (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Design Principles updated (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Canvas (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Canvas (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Thursday, 5 April)
• Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Posting to this list (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Design Principles Document update (Sunday, 1 April)

Lee Roberts

• RE: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Monday, 2 April)

liorean

• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: HTML/XHTML (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)

M. Jackson Wilkinson

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)

Maciej Stachowiak

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Design Principles Update (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Other roles we should fill (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: HTML5 proposal response (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (progress on recruiting editors) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Request for Decision: Design Principles (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Perception of HTML5 (was Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: A Graphics API (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Aphorisms of First Principle [was Proposed Design Principles] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Patents and public (was: RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Patents and public (was: RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Design Principles updated (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Organization Weakness Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 -- procedural issue (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Overall strategy (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 9 April)
• Intent to Conform (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Canvas (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Canvas (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Canvas (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 6 April)
• <canvas> (was Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Friday, 6 April)
• Why <video>? (was Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Why Have Design Principles? (was Re: Design Principles Document update) (Sunday, 1 April)

Magnus Kristiansen

• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Version information (Monday, 9 April)

Mallory Mollo

• Re: Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 11 April)

Marat Tanalin

• [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)

Marco Von Ballmoos

• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Versioning of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)

Marcos Caceres

• Re: Perception of HTML5 (was Re: Formal definition of HTML5) (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• RE: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)

Mark Birbeck

• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)

Martin Atkins

• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)

Marvin Carlos

• about this mailing list (Wednesday, 18 April)

Matt Freels

• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)

Matthew Ratzloff

• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: new form control (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Opt-in solutions ...and problems (was Re: Versioning and html[5]) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Was Re: Level of specification detail) (Wednesday, 11 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Thursday, 5 April)

Matthew Raymond

• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal -- from a proposed design principles point of view (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Microsoft versioning proposal (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Video proposals (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Patents and public (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Sunday, 8 April)
• VP3 as the Mandated Video Format? (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Monday, 2 April)

Maurice

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: missing principle (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Hand-coding HTML (was: New html-element: table3) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Semantic vs. Presentational (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: new form control (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Thursday, 26 April)

Michael A. Puls II

• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: splitting HTML5 into chunks (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: splitting HTML5 into chunks [was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5] (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 7 April)

Mihai Sucan

• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)

Mike Schinkel

• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Versioning and the end user (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Hand-coding HTML (was: New html-element: table3) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: How to refer to place of document, which is not marked by author!? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Semantic vs. Presentational (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Aphorisms of First Principle [was Proposed Design Principles] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Patents and public (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Monday, 9 April)
• Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 9 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Naming Wiki Pages (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Browser Fragment Positioning (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)

mikko.honkala@nokia.com

• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Friday, 13 April)
• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Murray Maloney

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: Design Principles (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Non-goal for HTML: A Graphics API (Monday, 16 April)
• Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Version information (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Version information (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Let every element have a src attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Bring back <ol start="N"> in Strict mode (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: abbreviations in canonical HTML (thoughts & concrete suggestions) (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)

nene@triin.net

• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 4 April)

Nick Drago

• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)

Nick Fitzsimons

• Re: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)

Niko Neugebauer

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Olivier GENDRIN

• Re: Introduce <term> element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: BoF at XTech (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: HTML5 proposal response (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Issue Tracking (was: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: New discussion group are need (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Use the role-attribute instead of predefined class names (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: ensuring the existence & enhancing the power of Q (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: HTML5 vs HTML6 (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: <abbr>, <acronym> and initialisms (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: <abbr>, <acronym> and initialisms (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Superstructure markup (Monday, 2 April)

olivier Thereaux

• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Thursday, 5 April)
• Role of Chair (Was: Microsoft has now joined the HTML Working Group) (Thursday, 5 April)

Patrick Taylor

• Re: Hand-coding HTML (was: New html-element: table3) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)

paul haine

• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: HTML5 vs HTML6 (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Posting to this list (Monday, 2 April)

Philip & Le Khanh

• Re: Support Existing Content (Monday, 30 April)

Philip Taylor

• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: splitting HTML5 into chunks (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Philip Taylor (Webmaster)

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Meta-question : why so few "Re: " subjects ? (Monday, 30 April)
• Meta-question : why so few "Re: " subjects ? (Monday, 30 April)

Preston L. Bannister

• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles review (Friday, 27 April)
• HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Now there is table-element with predetermined quantity of column. But sometimes we need to visualize three tables (for example, database tables) as one table: first table contains names of rows, second table contains names of columns (this table (Monday, 23 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: Microsoft versioning proposal (Sunday, 22 April)
• Versioning and the end user (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Sunday, 15 April)
• Semantics is not semantics (was: HTML WG Glossary) (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: <table> terse mode for data entry (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Sunday, 8 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: <table type="rowsortable"> (Thursday, 5 April)
• Re: Design Principles Document update (Sunday, 1 April)

Raven Brooks

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 4 April)

Razvan MIHAIU

• Re: wg members status (Thursday, 12 April)

Rene Saarsoo

• Re: new form control (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Thursday, 12 April)

Rick Mans

• Re: rel=noreferrer (Sunday, 8 April)

Rimantas Liubertas

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Tuesday, 3 April)

Robert Accettura

• rel=noreferrer (Sunday, 8 April)

Robert Brodrecht

• RE: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• RE: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Mandated Video Format (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Introduce <term> element (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: argument for deprecating BLOCKQUOTE in canonical HTML/XHTML (Wednesday, 4 April)

Roger Johansson

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Sunday, 22 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

ryan

• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Was Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5) (Wednesday, 11 April)

Sam Ruby

• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Tuesday, 24 April)
• Versioning of HTML fragments (Monday, 23 April)

Sander Tekelenburg

• Re: <font> (was Support Existing Content) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: HTML version issue summary? (Wednesday, 25 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• RE: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: quality of authoring tools' output (Thursday, 19 April)
• RE: quality of authoring tools' output (was Versioning and html[5]) (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• RE: Versioning and html[5] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Opt-in solutions ...and problems (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Pandering to poor authorship (was Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote>) (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Level of specification detail (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Alternate HTML 5 adoption proposal? (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Saturday, 7 April)
• Re: DefaultStyleSheet05: (was Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Friday, 6 April)
• Re: Form fields for uploading (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: [whatwg] Default (informal) Style Sheet (Sunday, 1 April)

Sander van Lambalgen

• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)

Schalk Neethling

• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: [suggestion] Allow DIV inside any element (Sunday, 29 April)
• Re: task list (Sunday, 29 April)
• task list (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt (Monday, 23 April)
• Current working draft (Saturday, 14 April)
• HTML/XHTML (Saturday, 14 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: innerHTML and setTimeout (Monday, 9 April)

Scott Turner

• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Parsing of HTML fragments (Wednesday, 25 April)

Sean Fraser

• Re: survey of top web sites (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: RE: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: survey of top web sites (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Re: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Thursday, 19 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate] (Sunday, 15 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 11 April)

Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer

• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Tuesday, 3 April)

Shadow2531

• Re: [whatwg] <video> element feedback (Sunday, 1 April)

Shane Thacker

• Re: Proposing <indent> vs. <blockquote> (Monday, 16 April)

Shawn Medero

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Tuesday, 10 April)

Sierk Bornemann

• Re: The HTMLWG and WHATWG (Was: Default (informal) Style Sheet) (Thursday, 5 April)

Simon Pieters

• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much? (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Opt-in solutions ...and problems (was Re: Versioning and html[5]) (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Version information (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Versioning and html[5] (Thursday, 12 April)

Smylers

• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: missing principle (Saturday, 28 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: [public-html] <none> (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: missing principle (Friday, 27 April)
• Re: Feature Strings (Friday, 20 April)

stefan2904

• Re: wg members status (Friday, 13 April)
• Re: wg members status (Wednesday, 11 April)

Stephen Stewart

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Friday, 27 April)

Sylvain Eliade

• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

T.V Raman

• HTML WG teleconference 2007-04-26 minutes for review (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Tuesday, 17 April)
• Re: Non-goal for HTML: Picture-perfect rendering (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• RE: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information) (Monday, 16 April)
• Re: HTML5 vs HTML6 (Wednesday, 4 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• HTML5 vs HTML6 (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles updated (Tuesday, 3 April)
• Re: Proposed Design Principles (Monday, 2 April)

Terje Bless

• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Saturday, 21 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Editor and authors (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: The argument for |bugmode| (Friday, 20 April)
• Re: Request for Decision: HTML5 Proposal (Wednesday, 18 April)
• Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (Monday, 16 April)

Thomas Broyer

• Re: INPUT-PIC form control (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Re[2]: Fwd: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Thursday, 26 April)
• Re: Separation of versioning concerns (Wednesday, 25 April)
• Re: Re[2]: New html-element: table3 (Tuesday, 24 April)

Tina Holmboe

• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)
• Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review) (Monday, 30 April)

Vitaly Harisov

• Re: text/javascript as default for type attribute (Tuesday, 3 April)
• text/javascript as default for type attribute (Monday, 2 April)
• Bring back <ol start="N"> in Strict mode (Monday, 2 April)
• Re: E-mail subscription and RSS (Saturday, 31 March)

Zdenko Vujasinović

• Re: tasks to supplement HTML specification development (Thursday, 12 April)
• Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5 (Wednesday, 11 April)

Last message date: Monday, 30 April 2007 23:57:52 UTC