- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 13:12:18 +0900
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>, scott lewis <sfl@scotfl.ca>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
-public-html
+www-archive
Scott,
Robert Burns (3 oct. 2007 - 12:56) :
> My point was that nothing in those documents tells us about the big
> picture regarding the intent of those major vendors with respect to
> XHTML2 or HTML5 (other than that they made intellectual property
> available to this WG as do we all). So I would still say that we
> members of the HTML WG (humble or otherwise) could not possibly
> know the intent of the browser vendors regarding XHTML2 support".
> Certainly the citations you provided change nothing about that.
Robert is right. These documents say nothing about the intents.
And even when a vendor is making a statement, it can change its
position later on depending on marketing and market constraints.
It has already happened in the past.
http://www.bestkungfu.com/archive/date/2004/07/on-implementing-svg/
http://www.xmlhack.com/read.php?item=1865
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 04:12:53 UTC