- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2011 10:40:18 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 14:32 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > > > > Again, what are the reasons to link to the WHATWG HTML version? What > > does it mean for the work of the HTML Working Group? There are features > > in the WHATWG version that got rejected in the HTML Working Group. See > > > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/introduction.html#how-do-the-whatwg-and-w3c-specifications-differ? > > > > This list keeps growing. > > This is exactly _why_ we should reference the WHATWG copy rather than the > W3C one. The W3C one has a growing list of intentional errors. They're not errors, they're decision by the Working Group. The fact that the editor of the W3C HTML5 specification considers the differences as errors is highly disturbing as well. Philippe
Received on Friday, 5 August 2011 14:40:28 UTC