Re: Removal of other semantic elements

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Shelley Powers <> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <> wrote:
>> Um, what?  It was a simple request.  I even put a smilie at the end to
>> make sure the correct intention, that of a helpful correction, was
>> sent over the wire.
>> Chill, Shelley.
> That it's seemingly OK for Doug to cc the list, but was not OK for me
> to reply to his email, and also include the list, was rude.

Doug had legitimate comments about styling that could be usefully
answered by the CSSWG.  I answered them.  Your email had nothing to do
with styling.  It is standard mailing-list etiquette (though
unfortunately, not always *common*) to only CC lists that are relevant
to the discussion.  I sent you a reminder to hopefully head off any
further pollution of the conversation.  I don't look forward to
reading irrelevant discussion when I open up a mailing-list thread.

> That you termed my email "polluting" when it was focused on relevant
> topic material, but considered Doug's email was OK, was also rude.

Doug's email was relevant to the CSSWG.  Your response to his was not.
 If you had devoted a section to responding to the styling-related
topics he had brought up, or had sent a separate email concerning
that, it would have been fine.

> That you would instruct me to pay attention to the cc list, like I'm
> some kind of newbie in this forum was rude.

You didn't pay attention to the cc list.  Whether or not this makes
you a newbie is not for me to say.

> And if I were to tell you where you can shove your smiley, why then my
> statement would also be rude. So I won't.

Indeed, it would be incredibly rude.  Thank you for not doing so,
though the implication of mentioning it is still rather questionable.

Chill, Shelley.


Received on Monday, 5 April 2010 20:32:24 UTC