- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 11:52:46 +0200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, www-archive@w3.org
On 2012-07-20 22:18, Ian Hickson wrote: > > (responding on www-archive since, as mentioned in the original e-mail, the > WHATWG list is for technical discussions, not political ones) > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012, Steve Faulkner wrote: >> >> I believe you have made some spurious claims, one of them being; >> >> "The WHATWG effort is focused on developing the >> canonical description of HTML and related technologies" >> >> The claim that HTML the living standard is canonical appears to imply >> that the requirements and advice contained within HTML the living >> standard is more correct than what is in the HTML5 specification. > > What I meant was just that the highest priority in the WHATWG spec is in > making a spec that describes what is implemented, rather than what anyone > wishes was implemented. Both the W3C HTML spec and the WHATWG spec describe things that are not implemented. Actually, the WHATWG spec seems to contain *more* of that. > ... Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 21 July 2012 09:53:24 UTC