Re: ... other formats in HTML ... (offlist)

Anne,

On reflection, I believe I agree. It would have been better for me to 
have raised my objection offlist to Maciej, as you so politely did 
with me in this case.

I suspect that Maciej (hi Maciej) remembers my early concerns over 
the design principles -- I was merely resurfacing to point out that 
my concern still exists about the scope of their application. The 
grin on my face as I did so, may not have been apparent. Overall, I 
am finding myself agreeing with you and Maciej on issues, these days, 
altogether more often than I am comfortable with :) Wish I had more 
time to contribute "productively."  Maybe next semester.

best regards,
David

At 10:39 AM 12/1/2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 16:25:45 +0100, Dailey, David P.
><david.dailey@sru.edu> wrote:
>>On Sat 12/1/2007 9:48 AM Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>>>Our Design Principles require compatibiity with existing content, so
>>>we can't remove existing functionality.
>>It wasn't clear to me that our design principles "require" anything.
>>Quoting from http://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/
>>1. These design principles are an attempt to capture consensus on design
>>approach. They are pragmatic rules of thumb that must be balanced
>>against each other, not absolutes.
>>and
>>2. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in
>>progress.
>
>This stuff is also in the charter and it's pretty obvious by now what the
>constraints are for evolving HTML. Is it really necessary to make such
>e-mails? I think it would be better if you stated why you disagree with
>the constraint rather than starting a "flamewar" on whether or not the
>design principles require anything (I agree that they don't, they simply
>illustrate our constraints, and therefore it comes down to the same thing).
>
>
>--
>Anne van Kesteren
><http://annevankesteren.nl/>
><http://www.opera.com/>

Received on Monday, 3 December 2007 14:42:08 UTC