W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2010

Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-125

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 07:21:41 +0000 (UTC)
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1011140718580.11018@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> 
> The best solution to a whole group of problems here is IMHO to define 
> that <meta http-equiv> has no relation to HTTP headers at all. Any and 
> all similarities with http and http headers is a historical artifact.

For what it's worth, that's more or less what HTML does currently.


> By defining that http-equiv isn't related to http at all, we can remove 
> *all* willful violations, since the only spec we'd be following is 
> HTML5.

That is technically the case currently already; the only reason I 
mentioned the "willful violation" here is that people seem to like when I 
document known differences where they might expect things to work as per 
other specs. I'm happy to remove it if people think that's more accurate.


> It would also save the working group time by invalidating this and other 
> issues.

I'm happy to make it more explicit if that would help, either in response 
to a bug or (if the chairs thing that would be more helpful) in response 
to a working group decision stemming from an counter-change-proposal for 
this or another related issue.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 14 November 2010 07:22:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:06 UTC