- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 14:32:53 +0300
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Aug 31, 2009, at 14:22, Julian Reschke wrote: >>>> Apart from this whether this is or is not a requirement, what is >>>> useful about this being defined in HTML5 if it has absolutely no >>>> effect on anyone whatsoever? >>> >>> It isn't. It was Ian's choice to do it this way. My proposal is >>> and was to leave the registration in a separate document, which >>> can continue to also reference previous specs. >> That is not an answer to my question. But since you put it this >> way, why would the media type registration document have to >> reference the previous specifications? > > Because the point of a media type registration is to point > recipients to a description of the format, sufficient to understand > the document. Now I'm confused by your argument. Why do *recipients* need anything more than the processing requirements given by HTML5? -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 11:33:35 UTC