- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 10:09:00 +0000
- To: public-html@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12581
Summary: In the section about the time element it is stated
that it does not need the datetime attribute set if
its textContent is a valid date or time string. So the
selector here in the rendering section,
time[datetime], might mislead implementors to not
apply a
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Platform: Other
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the
-time-element-0
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson)
AssignedTo: ian@hixie.ch
ReportedBy: contributor@whatwg.org
QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org,
public-html@w3.org
Specification:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/rendering.html
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-time-element-0
Comment:
In the section about the time element it is stated that it does not need the
datetime attribute set if its textContent is a valid date or time string. So
the selector here in the rendering section, time[datetime], might mislead
implementors to not apply a time binding if the attribute is missing but the
textContent is a valid date or time string.
Posted from: 78.52.70.139
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_7; de-de)
AppleWebKit/533.21.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.5 Safari/533.21.1
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Monday, 2 May 2011 10:09:01 UTC