- From: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:43:37 -0400
Matthew Thomas wrote:
> On 14 Jul, 2004, at 12:55 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> Uh, I never mentioned tabs. I was explaining what "mutually exclusive
>> sections" meant.
>
> Apologies. For the previous 14 days people had been discussing them
> under the assumption that they were the same.
Actually, I think the confusion comes from the difference between
semantic mutual exclusion and presentational mutual exclusion. For
presentation, tabs are mutually exclusive, as they allow only one
section to be viewable at one time. Assuming elements for use in making
tabs and wizards are named semantically, the term "exclusive" should
probably not be part of the names.
> Maybe we should all
> quieten down a little, to let you shorten that backlog and nip any
> similar misunderstandings in the bud.
I wonder if it might not be possible to come up with a system for
tracking suggestions for WHAT WG specs that are made by the public.
Perhaps something similar to Bugzilla, or some kind of wiki system. That
way, we wouldn't have to go fishing in the mailing list archives for
other people's ideas on features for WHAT WG specifications. It would
also help people understand why something was rejected.
For instance, people could go to a web page that has a list of
topics like "hiding legacy code", then click on the "<ignore>"
suggestion and see not only my idea for the <ignore> element, but Ian's
reasoning for why it should not be included. People could then add their
own thoughts on the matter.
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 2004 07:43:37 UTC