- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:38:20 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Jonas Sicking wrote: >> >> ... >> In short, the same benefit you get from removing any redundant >> feature. The question should never be "why not have this feature in >> the spec", the question should always be "why should we have this >> feature in the spec". >> ... > > Somebody once said: "the optimal number of optional features in a spec is > zero", and "you're done with a spec when there's nothing left to remove" > (maybe it way Yaron G.). > > Of course that doesn't always work well, but there's a lot of truth in it. > But: if we're really concerned with the size of the spec than there are far > bigger parts that could be removed. Agreed. But I don't think that changes anything. Unless the argument is "since there's one unneccesary feature in the spec it's ok to add more". If such an argument was made by anyone, that I would not agree with. I've successfully campaigned against features before (.tags() and <dialog>), and I hope to find more to campaign against. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 28 October 2009 21:39:14 UTC