- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:45:45 +0100
- To: "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: "Leif Halvard Silli" <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "Philip Taylor" <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, "HTMLwg WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:26:10 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > On 03/24/2010 06:13 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> This thread started out about whether it was a good idea that >> xmlns="..." was a good validator mode switch. > > Correction: this thread[1] started seeking the rationale for the current > authoring requirements. I was wondering whether I should have said sub-thread. :-) >> It seems you are instead >> arguing for retaining some presentational elements. Did you file a bug >> on introducing <strike> again in the draft? I'm not really opposed to >> that personally. > > People are welcome to pursue such bugs individually, but until 7034 is > resolved, I think it is only fair to warn people that I will consider > such resolutions provisional until the overall strategy question is > settled. Everything is provisional until, say, we exit Last Call. > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0452.html -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2010 22:46:43 UTC