- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Henri Sivonen (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Karl Dubost (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Manu Sporny (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Maciej Stachowiak (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Rob Sayre (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Sam Ruby (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Julian Reschke (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Karl Dubost (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Manu Sporny (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Sam Ruby (Saturday, 28 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Dan Brickley (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Ben Adida (Friday, 27 February)
Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Robert J Burns (Friday, 27 February)
Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com (Saturday, 28 February)
Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel Mark Nottingham (Friday, 27 February)
- summary="" in HTML5 Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 24 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Gez Lemon (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Steven Faulkner (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Steven Faulkner (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Steven Faulkner (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Simon Pieters (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Simon Pieters (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Leif Halvard Silli (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Steven Faulkner (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Steven Faulkner (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Simon Pieters (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Thursday, 26 February)
- RE: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Sailesh Panchang (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Matt Morgan-May (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Dan Connolly (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Maciej Stachowiak (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Dan Connolly (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Maciej Stachowiak (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Matt Morgan-May (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Maciej Stachowiak (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 David Poehlman (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Julian Reschke (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Matt Morgan-May (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Julian Reschke (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Matt Morgan-May (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Matt Morgan-May (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Robert J Burns (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Smylers (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Joshue O Connor (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Smylers (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" and Universal Design in HTML5 Joshue O Connor (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Leif Halvard Silli (Friday, 27 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Maciej Stachowiak (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Leif Halvard Silli (Thursday, 26 February)
disinterested chairing [was Re: summary="" in HTML5] Robert J Burns (Thursday, 26 February)
Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Ian Hickson (Thursday, 26 February)
Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Philip Taylor (Thursday, 26 February)
Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Robert J Burns (Friday, 27 February)
Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 James Graham (Thursday, 26 February)
Re: summary="" in HTML5 ISSUE-32 Leif Halvard Silli (Thursday, 26 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Alexander Surkov (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Philip Taylor (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns David Bolter (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Maciej Stachowiak (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns David Bolter (Wednesday, 18 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Saturday, 21 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Geoffrey Sneddon (Saturday, 21 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Joshue O Connor (Saturday, 21 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns William Loughborough (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Saturday, 21 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Rob Sayre (Monday, 23 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Simon Pieters (Monday, 23 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Monday, 23 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Rob Sayre (Monday, 23 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns David Singer (Monday, 23 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns David Poehlman (Monday, 23 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Tuesday, 24 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Rob Sayre (Tuesday, 24 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Tuesday, 24 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Rob Sayre (Tuesday, 24 February)
- "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) John Foliot - WATS.ca (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) Jonas Sicking (Wednesday, 25 February)
- RE: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) John Foliot - WATS.ca (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) Rob Sayre (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) Geoffrey Sneddon (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: "Where's the Beef?" department (was RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns) Matt Morgan-May (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Laura Carlson (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 25 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Wednesday, 25 February)
- Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 25 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Ian Hickson (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Ian Hickson (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns David Singer (Saturday, 21 February)
- RE: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns John Foliot - WATS.ca (Saturday, 21 February)
Re: Example canvas element use - accessibility concerns Joshue O Connor (Friday, 20 February)
Change to AAA Ian Hickson (Thursday, 12 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Lachlan Hunt (Wednesday, 11 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Wednesday, 11 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Friday, 13 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Rob Sayre (Friday, 13 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Boris Zbarsky (Monday, 16 February)
- XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms Julian Reschke (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: XHTML namespace, DOCTYPE, and other versioning mechanisms Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Sam Ruby (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Sam Ruby (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: Reuse of 1999 XHTML namespace, text/html and application/xhtml+xml media types Dan Connolly (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Review of xhtml-media-types Larry Masinter (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Reuse of 1999 XHTML namespace, text/html and application/xhtml+xml media types Sam Ruby (Thursday, 19 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Lachlan Hunt (Monday, 16 February)
- RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Monday, 16 February)
- Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Tuesday, 17 February)
ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") Maciej Stachowiak (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types (was Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong") Maciej Stachowiak (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Maciej Stachowiak (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Julian Reschke (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Maciej Stachowiak (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robin Berjon (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Smylers (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: several messages Ian Hickson (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: several messages Robert J Burns (Friday, 20 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Ian Hickson (Friday, 20 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Friday, 20 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Ian Hickson (Friday, 20 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Friday, 20 February)
Entropy w.r.t. Namespace Discussion Sam Ruby (Friday, 20 February)
(no subject) Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Boris Zbarsky (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Robert J Burns (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types ISSUE-60 Smylers (Wednesday, 18 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Dan Connolly (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Dean Edridge (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 18 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Rob Sayre (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Rob Sayre (Tuesday, 17 February)
table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Julian Reschke (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: table/@summary, Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Leif Halvard Silli (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Robert J Burns (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Wednesday, 18 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Dan Connolly (Wednesday, 18 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Maciej Stachowiak (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Philip TAYLOR (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Maciej Stachowiak (Wednesday, 18 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Thursday, 19 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Thursday, 19 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Thursday, 19 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Larry Masinter (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Boris Zbarsky (Thursday, 19 February)
RE: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Rob Sayre (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Sam Ruby (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Ian Hickson (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Sam Ruby (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Maciej Stachowiak (Thursday, 19 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Laurens Holst (Tuesday, 24 February)
Re: ISSUE-4: Versioning, namespace URIs and MIME types Sam Ruby (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 16 February)
What's the problem with Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace? Robert J Burns (Monday, 16 February)
What's the problem with Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace? Robert J Burns (Monday, 16 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Robin Berjon (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Philip TAYLOR (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Robin Berjon (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Karl Dubost (Tuesday, 17 February)
RE: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Larry Masinter (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Karl Dubost (Tuesday, 17 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Edward O'Connor (Monday, 16 February)
Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" Anne van Kesteren (Monday, 16 February)
Rendering: typos Anne van Kesteren (Thursday, 5 February)
- Implementation of head@profile Larry Masinter (Thursday, 5 February)
- RE: Implementation of head@profile Larry Masinter (Thursday, 5 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Maciej Stachowiak (Thursday, 5 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Henri Sivonen (Thursday, 5 February)
- Re: Design principles - building from justification Sam Ruby (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: Design principles - building from justification Maciej Stachowiak (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Leif Halvard Silli (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Maciej Stachowiak (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Henri Sivonen (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Leif Halvard Silli (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Dan Connolly (Wednesday, 11 February)
"downplayed errors" Ian Hickson (Thursday, 5 February)
Re: "downplayed errors" Henri Sivonen (Tuesday, 10 February)
Re: "downplayed errors" Jon Barnett (Tuesday, 10 February)
Re: head@profile: another dropped attribute Julian Reschke (Thursday, 5 February)
Rendering: comments Anne van Kesteren (Wednesday, 4 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Maciej Stachowiak (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Monday, 2 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Karl Dubost (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Henri Sivonen (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Tuesday, 3 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Friday, 6 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Ian Hickson (Saturday, 7 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Maciej Stachowiak (Saturday, 7 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Dan Connolly (Wednesday, 11 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" James Craig (Thursday, 12 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Charles McCathieNevile (Thursday, 12 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Steven Faulkner (Thursday, 12 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Dan Connolly (Wednesday, 18 February)
- Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" Joshue O Connor (Wednesday, 18 February)
Re: Spec license (was: Re: Discussions with plh) Philippe Le Hegaret (Tuesday, 3 February)
Re: Charter (was: Re: Discussions with plh) Philippe Le Hegaret (Tuesday, 3 February)
Last message date: Saturday, 28 February 2009 23:34:03 UTC