- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 23:57:16 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Apr 7, 2010, at 9:21 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 07.04.2010 18:02, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>> ...
>> Why not simply remove any and all mention of @profile from the HTML5
>> specification? This way the separate @profile spec that is being
>> developed (right?) has the freedom to define anything it wants. This
>> would put @profile on par with RDFa and Microdata.
>> ...
>
> I think the answer to this is that the spec still wants to define
> the DOM IDL attribute (which I actually missed when I claimed that
> there was no required implementation behavior).
>
> Thus, we'd still need:
>
> -- snip --
> [Supplemental]
> interface HTMLHeadElement {
> attribute DOMString profile;
> };
>
> The profile IDL attribute of the head element must reflect the
> content attribute of the same name, as if the attribute's value was
> just a string. (In other words, the value is not resolved in any way
> on getting.)
> -- snip --
>
> I'd be ok with this, avoiding misleading statements about what
> @profile is for, and delegating the documentation to a proper spec.
I asked Ian privately if he'd be ok with this approach, i.e. remove
the description of what @profile is supposed to be for or its intended
syntax. He said he is ok with this, so I encouraged him to make that
change in hopes that this can lead to an amicable resolution.
Regards,
Maciej
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2010 06:57:52 UTC