Re: Differences between the W3C and WHATWG specifications

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 06/22/2010 04:06 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Jun 2010, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > > 
> > > I understand that Ian fixed a bug.  What I don't understand (and the
> > > context here is the topic of convergence) is why Ian agreed to fix that
> > > bug, but only in the W3C copy of the spec.
> > 
> > I made the change only in the W3C version because I believe it's a bad
> > change, but did not believe it was bad enough to argue against.
> > 
> > > Either there is a problem with it or there is not. To fix it in just
> > > one spec is, in itself, an indication that convergence is felt to be
> > > an important criteria.
> > 
> > Fair enough. Since I feel, as you do, that convergence is an important
> > criteria, I've done as you suggest and reverted the change from the
> > W3C copy.
> 
> Note: while I suggested convergence, I neither suggested reversion from 
> the W3C draft or incorporation into the WHATWG draft.

If that isn't exactly what you were suggesting above when suggesting that 
just one spec should be changed, then I really have no idea what it is you 
were suggesting. If you could be clearer in these requests that would be 
most helpful.


> In any case, please attend to the resolution of bug 9241 as the previous 
> resolution no longer matches the editor's decision.

I am now at a loss as to what you want me to do.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 24 June 2010 00:26:39 UTC