- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 16:23:43 +0200
- To: public-html@w3.org
Le 19/05/12 16:02, Leif Halvard Silli a écrit : > To my dismay the info I gathered from Softpress last year, and which I > think said essentially the same thing that Daniel and Julian said > (namely that they are not going to remove the generator despite its > effects on validation), was not included in the reopen request (the > CP): [1] I would like to say something important, at least to me: whatever is the reason a specific behaviour was added to the generator meta tag, and even if it's a very good reason related to a11y or whatever, I still think it's a very bad idea. I would think the same even if it was something enormously important. There is nothing that should be changed in the way <meta name="generator"...> is used by editing tools and authors today. If some need a hacky mechanism based on it, it's because @alt handling rules are flawed from the very beginning. I don't think adding a hacky fix to something I have always found broken is a good path to follow here. </Daniel>
Received on Saturday, 19 May 2012 14:24:10 UTC