- From: Manuel Amador <rudd-o@rudd-o.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:13:12 -0500
> > Wait...Apple and Nokia posit an potential patent threat as justification > to remove the text, but patent and other "Intellectual Property" reasons > aren't justification for putting it back? > > Great double standard there. Yeah, agreed. It amazes me how so far the discussion has been incredibly double-standarded and slippery. This discussion amounts to "we can't paint the wall green because then it would be green" with a few tangents here and there. Fully agreed with you, Jeff. > As a show of good faith, revert the text, then have the discussion. If > a better solution is found that meets everyone's criteria, hey great. > But reverting the text to what it was can be considered a show of good > faith since, clearly, the text that was put in its place can't stand for > the spec to go to fruition. Yes, do us the honor of restoring the text in good faith while the discussion continues. It's not like you're gonna ratify HTML5 tomorrow as a sour Christmas present anyway. -- Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) <rudd-o at rudd-o.com> Rudd-O.com - http://rudd-o.com/ GPG key ID 0xC8D28B92 at http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ You'll never see all the places, or read all the books, but fortunately, they're not all recommended. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20071211/988f41f5/attachment.pgp>
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 17:13:12 UTC