- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:36:22 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Matt Morgan-May <mattmay@adobe.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, Steve Axthelm <steveax@pobox.com>, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>, "wai-xtech@w3.org" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "wai-liaison@w3.org" <wai-liaison@w3.org>, "janina@rednote.net" <janina@rednote.net>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: >> David Poehlman wrote: >>> hmm, I like #2 but I would ad that it is my contention that we don't break >>> backwards compatibility. >>> ... >> Indeed. >> >> Come up with something better, and *deprecate* the old feature in order to >> make the transition. > > That's in fact exactly what HTML5 does today. Nope. A document using @summary would need to be valid.
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 08:37:10 UTC