On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Denis Boudreau <dboudreau@accessibiliteweb.com> wrote: > > On 2010-01-05, at 8:06 PM, John Foliot wrote: > > I am at a complete loss as to why some members of the community are > hell-bent for leather on dismissing @summary given that it is an optional > attribute to begin with. You don't want to use it? Don't. Leave it there > for those of us that do want to use it, or are mandated by policy (or > soon, in Denis' case, Quebec law). > > As a member of this list, I would very much appreciate justification, based > on this comment by John. It's a redundant feature. IMHO of course. > It does not hurt HTML5, and in fact, > as Denis pointed out, enables Quebec-based web developers to adopt HTML5 > more easily - as no matter the numerous advantages that HTML5 might > deliver to those developers, if they cannot comply with their law, they > will be barred from using HTML5 - period! *THAT* friends is a real > problem, and not the trumped up pseudo-harm that the editor keeps going on > about. > > And to this as well, of course. > Quebec may not be the United States, but still. We have a real problem here. Does Quebec really have a law that mandates @summary to be used? While that seems like an utterly stupid law I guess I wouldn't put that past a government. South Korea mandates a specific encryption algorithm [1]. Do you think we should put this encryption algorithm in SSL because of this? [1] http://blog.mozilla.com/gen/2007/02/27/the-cost-of-monoculture/ / JonasReceived on Wednesday, 6 January 2010 07:50:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:06 UTC