W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: [DRAFT] Heartbeat poll - update 2

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 11:26:38 +0000 (UTC)
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908021122090.28566@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009, Sam Ruby wrote:
> If John removes his objection, and nobody else comes forward, then there 
> will be no remaining options, and therefore no poll.  If he does not, 
> there are two options:
>   1) Publish with @summary marked as obsolete
>   2) Publish with @summary marked as deprecated

Given the recent confusion over what those terms mean (in particular, 
given that the HTML5 spec uses the word "obsolete" in a manner that is 
distinct from the way that HTML4 uses both "obsolete" and "deprecated"), 
it would be useful if such a poll defined the terms so that there is no 
ambiguity about what the decision actually is.

(As an editor, I'd have no idea what to do given as a resolution either 
"mark summary as obsolete" or "mark summary as deprecated". As far as I 
can tell, HTML5 could be argued to do both already.)

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 2 August 2009 11:36:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:52 UTC