Re: ISSUE 86 and removing atom transform section - focusing

On Apr 16, 2010, at 2:34 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> I object to summarily removing it.  If it does become an LC blocker,
> I'd support removing it; it'll remain the WHATWG version of the spec
> in any case.  I believe the issues with the algorithm are minor and
> can be resolved quickly, though.

All right, let's see if we can come up with an algorithm change that  
no one objects to, otherwise this issue may end up going to a poll and  
written decision.


Received on Friday, 16 April 2010 21:51:22 UTC