- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 15:34:08 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Tab Atkins Jr., Thu, 10 Dec 2009 08:12:38 -0600: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >> So if what the spec requires isn't your top consideration you probably >> shouldn't care whether it requires or just allows ignoring the HTTP >> content-type. > > Please don't be ridiculous. The meaning of that statement is that the > spec is less important than reality when making decisions. That > doesn't imply that he or any other browser developer 'doesn't care' > what the spec says. It's quite the opposite in fact; it's in > everyone's best interests that the spec declare something that matches > reality, so that corner cases aren't different between impls and they > don't have to waste QA time and money on checking if the way other > browsers do things is better. > > The willingness to ignore the spec when it's incorrect is not a > statement that the spec is worthless, as long as the spec is willing > to update itself. "Willingness to ignore the spec" could mean "willingness to let the HTTP content-type have priority over the <object>'s @type attribute, despite what HTML 5 says". Julian was simply asking if the spec was willing to update itself in this regard, so that it would not be necessary to break HTML 5. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 14:34:49 UTC