- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 03:20:21 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, William Loughborough <wloughborough@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Sam Ruby wrote: > > Let me enumerate a few possible ways forward. [...] > > Option #5 is to accept what currently is in Ian's draft. Option #6 is for people to actually respond to my requests for explanations of the various proposals that people have made, so that I can actually understand people's positions. As has been demonstrated multiple times even with the summary="" attribute, when people make reasoned arguments and demonstrate why their proposals are a good idea, I change the spec to follow them. The spec right now is not at all what I would like it to be for summary="" because it is written based on compelling arguments and data, not on what I want. (Specifically: I would like to just obsolete the sumary="" attribute entirely and not include it even in UA conformance criteria, replacing it entirely with the solutions that are far more likely to actually improve accessibility of the Web. But what I want isn't relevant to what the spec says, because I don't base it on opinons.) -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 26 July 2009 03:21:00 UTC