- From: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
- Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 13:29:32 +0200
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 1 Jun 2007, at 02:40, Ian Hickson wrote: > * Include links to relevant research on the wiki page. That could be: > > * Links to pages that are working around the lack of the > feature being > proposed. > > * Surveys (even of a few dozen sites) showing authoring > practices, so > that we can determine authoring patterns around the topic. (I > might > take such surveys to greater lengths if possible and useful by > running similar types of scans at Google.) > > * Test cases showing what existing browsers do. > > Making proposals with no research is another good way to lose > credibility fast. This requirement conforms very well to design principles such as "Support Existing Content", "Don't Reinvent The Wheel", "Pave The Cowpaths" etc. However, it effectively blocks out *novel* proposals that may be related to principles such as "Solve Real Problems", "Media Independence", "Universal Access" etc. Do we really need to be this conservative? -- Henrik
Received on Monday, 4 June 2007 11:31:10 UTC