- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 09:21:01 +0200
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- CC: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, 'Sam Ruby' <rubys@intertwingly.net>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>, 'W3C WAI-XTECH' <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > From my perspective, it seems that, despite knowing that the issue will > remain open and that any outcome is possible in the future, your > motivation for taking this route is to circumvent the process that has > so far been applied to every other feature either added to or rejected > from the spec. > ... A process which is not the W3C process. > What I do not understand is why it is so important for you to achieve > this minor victory of having @summary at least temporarily reinstated > now knowing full well that it stands every chance of being overturned > based on new evidence in a subsequent draft once this issue really is > resolved. Likewise, the text in Hixie's current draft also stands equal > chance of being overturned based on new evidence. You are missing something important: previous "evidence" was *not* generally accepted as sufficient. Furthermore, even if we had that evidence, many claim that a new spec then needs to propose a *replacement* for summary, which is not the case so far. > So far, it seems you've done a lot of complaining about how you claim > the draft simply reflects Hixie's own opinion, but yet don't seem to > consider it hypocritical that the draft you have proposed merely > reflects your personal opinion. It does reflect my opinion as well. I assume a similar poll could be done with respect to @profile, for example. > Personally, it is of little concern to me in what state the summary > attribute is in the upcoming Working Draft. I believe it is more > important continue investigating the issue in terms of research and > evidence, rather than bickering about what one Working Draft, published > solely to meet the heartbeat requirement, says, and using subversive > tactics to get your way. With each WD we are getting closer to LC (hopefully), and at some point of time we need to figure out a way to resolve controversial issues. Better do it now. Actually, we better had that done months ago. > ... BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 07:21:50 UTC