- From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
- Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 05:47:48 +0200
- To: <public-html@w3.org>
[Sorry, I'm too tired to think of a good new Subject for this. Not even that interested in entering in a debate over this. Just sort of venting, perhaps.] At 05:57 -0400 UTC, on 2007-08-01, Doug Schepers wrote: [...] >>> Sander Tekelenburg wrote: >>>> >>>> As hard as I try, I don't see how to interpret that as anything else >>>> then "UA vendors will do what they want, the rest of you will >>>> just have to play by some rules we set for you". > > I'm very confused by this attitude. Specifications without > implementations are useless. Sure. But the point was that proposals were constantly being dismissed with the argument that they must first demonstrate the need as well as that the proposed solution is the best possible one. Yet at the same time it appears to be deemed unnecessary to provide such demonstrations for new things that at this point already happen to be in the current version of the spec, apparently "because they are already implemented in UAs". (Sure, we hear that if there are problems with such already implemented features, they will have to be addressed. But we all understand that once something has beenimplemented by several UAs, the room to address issues, will get smaller and smaller.) -- Sander Tekelenburg The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 03:49:46 UTC