- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 07:50:21 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Zhiheng Wang <zhihengw@google.com>
- cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-web-perf <public-web-perf@w3.org>
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, Zhiheng Wang wrote: > > Philippe and I sync'ed up after the F2F meeting last Friday and we've > decided to resolve these references and making the spec (mostly) > self-contained. I am going over the references and see > > - if it's a concept, we can leave the reference as it is. > - if it's a process, we will keep a snap shot of the referred section in > the current draft. That seems like a really bad idea... what if the definitions change? The worst possible outcome would be for the two specs to diverge, resulting in conflicting requirements. What problem does doing this solve? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 07:50:54 UTC