- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:30:21 -0700
- To: "Simpson, Grant Leyton" <glsimpso@indiana.edu>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Simpson, Grant Leyton wrote: > I realize that it's late in the game now that a straw poll has gone out, but is it possible to have a new change proposal that charts a middle path between the ISO option and the ECMA option? Something to the effect of having the reference to the ANSI/ISO spec but providing an option to UA developers of using the ECMA spec due to its better availability (provided, of course, they are actually identical -- I have not compared them myself). I think it's a bit late to submit new proposals. Regarding whether the references are identical - I don't believe anyone in the Working has actually looked at a real copy of the ANSI/ISO spec. However, the ECMA spec claims it is also published as ISO/IEC 646, which Wikipedia says is the successor to ANSI X3.4 (ASCII). Assuming this information is accurate, it would appear that ECMA-6 is the product of joint development with ISO/IEC, and is the version of the ISO spec for ASCII as published by ECMA. I'm not an expert on these topics, and as I said, I have not seen an actual copy of the ISO spec, but I believe that here, as with other standards jointly published by EMCA and ISO, both versions are equivalent normative references. Regards, Maciej > > Best, > Grant Simpson > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 5:02 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > >> The poll is available here, and it will run through Friday, July 30th: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-101-objection-poll/ >> >> Please read the introductory text before entering your response. >> >> In particular, keep in mind that you don't *have* to reply. You only need to do so if you feel your objection to one of the options is truly strong, and has not been adequately addressed by a clearly marked objection contained within a Change Proposal or by someone else's objection. The Chairs will be looking at strength of objections, and will not be counting votes. >> >> Regards, >> Maciej Stachowiak >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 22 July 2010 16:38:47 UTC