hi Areyh, >Given the number of occurrences in the spec that would have to be >changed, I think there's a nontrivial risk that some errors would be >introduced in the process. So I wouldn't say "None". I find it difficult to fathom how potential errors introduced by the act of editing the spec could be put forward as a legitimate risk. regards Stevef On 6 February 2011 00:44, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com<Simetrical%2Bw3c@gmail.com> > wrote: > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> > wrote: > > 4. Risks > > > > None. > > Given the number of occurrences in the spec that would have to be > changed, I think there's a nontrivial risk that some errors would be > introduced in the process. So I wouldn't say "None". > > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2011 03:02:45 UTC