- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 15:07:05 +0300
- To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote: > Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, 2012-07-31 15:13 -0700: > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Eoconnor/ISSUE-206 >> >> While this Change Proposal is both concrete and complete, I intend to >> solicit comments from conformance checker developers which may result in >> testimonials I would like to cite in the Rationale section. > > Speaking personally and only with my conformance-checker-developer hat on, > I strongly support this change proposal. I've not talked with Henri about > it yet, but if he were also supportive of it, then it's something we would > implement support for in the validator.nu sources (on which both the > validator.nu service and W3C Nu Markup Validation Service are based). I think this proposal would be eligible for implementation in Validator.nu if the proposal were adopted by the WG. > The meta@name=generator > exception currently in the spec does not. I agree that <meta name=generator> is a bad solution both because it tries to repurpose existing syntax in a way that's not expected by the current generators of the syntax and because of its lack of granularity. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 12:07:37 UTC