- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 09:26:46 -0600
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, tantek@cs.stanford.edu, Krzysztof Maczyński <1981km@gmail.com>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, public-html@w3.org
2010/2/21 Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>: > Julian Reschke, Sun, 21 Feb 2010 09:52:27 +0100: >> On 21.02.2010 09:42, Tantek Celik wrote: >>> In short, nothing for meta name (invisible data antipattern), and >>> nothing for data-* which is not intended for use as shared >>> vocabulary (as far as I can tell from reading the spec). >> >> ...which *does* mean that meta/@name needs to be included. >> >> I understand the antipattern argument, but that's orthogonal to the >> definition of @profile. >> >> I agree with the part about data-*. > > So then we are at least two persons that think data-* *should* be > included. If I'm reading Julian correctly, then no, he thinks that @profile should not affect data-* attributes. Data-* interactions with @profile is not required for any existing use-cases, and it is explicitly anti-recommended in the current HTML draft as data-* attributes should only carry private semantics, not publicly-shareable ones. If you believe you have concrete use-cases that show the contrary, please indicate them on the page and in the manner that Tantek requested. That will help ensure that maximum consideration is given to the idea. ~TJ
Received on Sunday, 21 February 2010 15:27:38 UTC