- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 12:36:29 +0200
- To: Charles McCathienevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Jonas Sicking <sicking@mozilla.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 12:30 PM, <chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > In the absence of any clear rationale, "It might change somehow" is effectively "FUD", much as "someone might have IPR" is. So while you are technically correct that a technology and its specification can change, that is effectively irrelevant. Before you start calling FUD, you might want to read up on my comment and the replies I got before you start spreading some of your own. It effectively comes down to the fact that the specification describes something, but Chrome implements it in another way per how I suggested it should work (using "animation frame tasks"). -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2014 10:36:58 UTC