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

2010/2/6 John Foliot <>:
> # [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:

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