- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:05:30 +0200
- To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Adam Barth, Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:04:23 -0700: > 2010/6/13 Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>: >> Adam Barth, Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:00:18 -0700: >>> 2010/6/12 Leif Halvard Silli : >>>> Ian Hickson, Sat, 12 Jun 2010 17:08:54 +0000 (UTC): >>>> […] >>>>> The WHATWG draft continues to exist because it's the >>>>> only way to have a specification that actually makes >>>>> sense in the face of the ridiculous decisions you keep making. >>>> […] >>>> >>>> Thanks for relaying to us that >>>> >>>> (1) you've considered making the WHATwg copy cease to exist, and >>>> (2) that its existence isn't related to "a much better license". >>> >>> I don't think either of those conclusions follow from what Ian wrote. >> >> Regarding (1), then he underlined the opposite possibility as well: >> >> ]] -- I've no idea what we'll do if you make a decision on an issue of >> normative relevance, like many of the issues that you keep pushing back >> and not resolving. [[ > > You seem to be making a lot of assumptions based on very little data. > I'm not sure Ian is empowered to make the W3C copy cease to exist. You misunderstood what "opposite" referred to. The opposite of ceasing to exist, is continued existence, including the "I've no idea what we'll do" option. Julian had no problems getting Ian's message: > I think it would be much more productive to simply apply the > editorial changes that were requested, instead of making the gap > between the specs even wider. [1] http://www.w3.org/mid/4C15EB2A.2000309@gmx.de -- leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 11:06:07 UTC