- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:31:01 -0800
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Feb 5, 2009, at 7:01 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > > Sam Ruby 2009-02-05 12.41: >> Rob Sayre wrote: >>> On 2/5/09 1:18 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: > >> There is a pleasing trend in this mailing list towards civility >> and people taking the time to describe other's point of view in >> a fair and balanced way before proceeding to describe an >> alternate point of view. >> Use of the term 'ideological' here bucks this trend. >> An alternate way to describe the development of HTML 5 to date >> is that it has been developed starting from zero, includes only >> features that are deemed necessary to meet presented and >> accepted use cases, and operates under the rather significant >> constraint that such a spec, if followed by implementers, won't >> break the web. > > Henri said that <font> is out for ideological reasons. That was a > claim about the non-WHATWG people, mostly. Then you offered the > "alternative" description that WHATWG started from zero. That to me > is simply a confirmation of what Henri said - namely that WHATWG > represents the non-ideological voice. I am pretty sure Henri was referring to Ian Hickson's ideology (specifically strong belief in separating presentation from content) when he referred to <font> being out for ideological reasons. I don't think he meant to insult non-WHATWG participants, and I do not think Ian would be greatly offended by Henri's remark either. Regards, Maciej
Received on Friday, 6 February 2009 06:31:43 UTC