- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 06:25:29 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, 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 interop? I'm confused. I mean that we don't have to have a spec to get browsers to all implement PNG or DOM2 Core. The whole point of the proposed spec would have been to document what interop exists, and what interop browser vendors predict the next generation will have, so such a spec by definition wouldn't be needed for interop. Thus, since we agree that on the long term it doesn't belong in HTML5, it doesn't make sense to add it to HTML5 just to remove it later. This is unlike other features that we added then removed later, which were added because there was an immediate need for a spec to obtain interop amongst interested implementors. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 06:26:06 UTC