- From: Shelley Powers <shelleypowers@burningbird.net>
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:55:04 -0600
- To: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Ian marked bug 8818 as WONTFIX, with the following: "EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: I'm happy to remove this attribute from the W3C HTML5 specification if that's what the working group wants. The last time I removed a feature based on a bug report such as this, I started a minor war, however, so I suggest that you raise this via the change proposal process if you really feel this way." I do not consider this to be a good rationale. I will raise this to an issue, but it's difficult enough writing a change proposal when the editor refuses to provide a decent reason why he is marking the bugs as WONTFIX. If he has a good reason for keeping this item, then I would at least know whether I should raise this to an issue, and if so, where I should focus my arguments. Frankly, I could put, "Remove srcdoc because putting markup into an attribute is problematic and ugly as hell", and will have provided better rationale than what was just provided. Actually, shorten that to, "srcdoc is ugly as hell", and my rationale will be superior. Shelley
Received on Sunday, 14 February 2010 10:28:20 UTC