- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 19:24:24 -0600
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jan 8, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Changes of this significance should have been discussed in the group >>> first. >> >> Seems like they did get discussion in the related bugs, and in general the >> particular split applied seems like a reasonable attempt to compromise >> between different positions presented, though some of the details of the >> split strike me as odd. >> >>> >>> If folks were concerned about the details section earlier, this change >>> is so far beyond that change, as to make the removal of details >>> nothing more than a minor nuisance. >> >> In a way it's a much smaller change, since the total of all the split specs >> ends up producing the same implementation and author requirements, whereas >> removing <details> was non-editorial change. On the other hand, this change >> seems to have broken a bunch of cross-references, which makes it hard to >> find relevant definitions and requirements. >> >> In any case, I believe the mechanism of splitting the spec makes it >> relatively easy to change the split boundaries. So we can have the >> discussion now, if anyone has a problem with the specific way the split was >> done. Let's try to flush those issues out before publishing more Working >> Drafts, so we don't thrash the TR page if we change our minds about how to >> do this. >> >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >> > > Check out bug 8118, to remove the Hidden attribute: > > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8118 > > Here's Ian's response: > > Status: Accepted > Change Description: no spec change > Rationale: The hidden="" attribute is no longer in the vocabulary spec, it's > now only defined in the split-out spec with the user interaction stuff. > > Now tell me something: is this the response of a person who is working > with the group? > > S > Oh, and hey! Look at that! Details is back. Are we having fun yet? Shelley
Received on Saturday, 9 January 2010 01:24:53 UTC