Re: Taking another round at @summary

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Denis Boudreau
<> 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?


/ Jonas

Received on Wednesday, 6 January 2010 07:50:58 UTC