- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:02:57 -0700
- To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Jun 29, 2007, at 3:16 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote: > >> Do you think there's a need to go into more detail than that? > > yes I do, that is why I proposed > > in "1.1. Open Issues" > > add to current text > > "The headers, longdesc and summary attributes." > > > To make it perfectly clear that the dropping or omission or whatever > of these attributes is an open issue. > > > Furthermore I was going to propose in my previous email, (that i sent > accidently before it was complete.) > > That a sentence be inserted in 3.6. Dropped Attributes > > "Note: The decision to drop of some of the attributes in this section > is currently being debated by the working group. As a consequence one > or more may be allowed in HTML 5" > > Again to ensure that the disputed status of headers, longdesc and > summary attributes is clearly recorded within the document. That seems like way too much attention to a single open issue in the spec. I understand that you care deeply about it, but the differences document should be mainly about describing the state of the spec, not going into extensive detail about open issues. I think you should focus your energy on helping with the research and analysis to address this area in the spec, not the diffs document. I leave it to the editor's best judgment wether it's worth expanding on the open issues language. Regards, Maciej > > On 29/06/07, ciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jun 29, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Steven Faulkner wrote: >> >> > >> >> But I don't see any suggested text for the proposed rationale. >> > >> > The rationale for dropping the headers,longdesc and summary >> attributes >> > was presumably formulated by the WHAT WG when the decisions to drop >> > these attributes was made. I would like to see the rationale >> formally >> > recorded in the differences document, but if that is not possible, >> > then at least I propose that >> > >> > in "1.1. Open Issues" >> > add to current text >> > The headers, longdesc and summary attributes. >> >> These are included in "Details of accessibility and media- >> independence features." (The more general description would also >> include things like alt, whether there should be a nicer way to make >> an image with full markup fallback, etc). Do you think there's a need >> to go into more detail than that? >> >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >> > > > -- > with regards > > Steve Faulkner > Technical Director - TPG Europe > Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium > > www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org >
Received on Friday, 29 June 2007 23:03:13 UTC