- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 17:05:29 +0100
- To: Roland Merrick <roland_merrick@uk.ibm.com>
- Cc: fd@w3.org, ishida@w3.org, public-xhtml2@w3.org, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Le mercredi 21 janvier 2009 à 15:54 +0000, Roland Merrick a écrit : > > Greetings Dom, as Shane indicated in his first reply we recognise the > benefit of doing what you suggest and intend to add @lang as part of > XHTML 1.2. We did consider adding it as part of a PER but felt that it > would not make it through the process since it would have a > compatibility issues. My reading of the process document would classify such a change as "Corrections that MAY affect conformance, but add no new features" http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#correction-classes in which case, this matches exactly the PER process. > Our judgement may have been over cautious and we would be prepared to > work with you and the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group to > investigate whether we could succeed if we went the route of a PER. > > Can you determine whether the MWBP would be prepared to work with us > to try the PER route and get back to us if support, and possibly > assistance, would be forthcoming. I'll bring that to the MWBP (whose next meeting is on Tuesday); I'm fairly confident there will be support for it; if you have further indication in terms of the assistance you might need, I'm more likely to get an answer from the group on that as well. Thanks a lot for considering my request! Dom
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 16:05:54 UTC