W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: "image analysis heuristics" (ISSUE-66)

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 13:56:48 -0600
Message-ID: <dd0fbad1002061156r349b2fe0wc8740e47e81abce0@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, public-html@w3.org, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>, w3c-archive@w3.org, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, 1981km@gmail.com
2010/2/6 John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>:
> # [03:00] <AryehGregor> Like "UAs should think up clever stuff to do if
> there's no alt text, but any author who relies on this will be held to
> judgment and suffer in hell for all eternity".
> # [03:00] <AryehGregor> (the latter part is non-normative)
> # [03:01] <AryehGregor> (unless you think you can God to follow the spec)
> # [03:01] <AryehGregor> s/God/get God/
> # [03:04] <TabAtkins> AryehGregor's summary is accurate.
> Both Aryeh and Tab are entitled to be jerks in private, but making changes
> to the specification based upon back-room banter is unacceptable (as well,
> here Tab appears to contradict himself from his previous public statement
> that removing the reference was acceptable:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jan/1203.html)

Sigh.  I'm a contradictory jerk?  Really?

Dude, I didn't contradict myself.  I think that removing the specific
technology reference and pointing to UUAG is acceptable (not
necessarily required, but acceptable).  Aryeh's summary doesn't say
anything against that.

And I really think that *was* an accurate summary.  It's what I got
out of the discussion, at least, and I read every message that comes
through this list.

So, seriously, tone down the rhetoric and insults.  It's not helpful.

Received on Saturday, 6 February 2010 19:57:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:58 UTC