- From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:53:07 -0500
- To: "'Ian Hickson'" <ian@hixie.ch>, "'Chris Wilson'" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Ian Hickson > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:36 PM > To: Chris Wilson > Cc: HTML WG > Subject: Re: Section 1.4.4 proposed text > > This doesn't mention the risk of vendor lock-in and the benefit of > vendor > neutrality, which are two of the most important points made in the > current > paragraph, IMHO. My 2 cents: I think that anyone reading this section of the HTML 5 spec (indeed, anyone reading any portion of it) is familiar with the various risks of such technologies. There is no need for the HTML specification to take what could be construed as a "political tone" regarding this topic. J.Ja
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 00:54:23 UTC