- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:35:31 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org
Sam Ruby wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > >>> Even if a better place can be found, why not follow your previous >>> policy of adding a section to HTML5 and moving it out if/when a >>> better venue is found? >> >> Because this isn't required for interop, and so it's not critical. > > Required for overlap? I'm confused. Ugg. s/overlap/interop/ > If we don't have a commitment to support the video element at all by the > dominant browser vendor, and the effective overlap in supported codecs > between the next three major browser vendors is zero... > > ... what meaningful overlap remains? Here too. > - Sam Ruby - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 01:36:17 UTC