- From: (unknown charset) Arjun Ray <aray@q2.net>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 02:21:47 -0500 (EST)
- To: (unknown charset) www-html@w3.org
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Tantek [ISO-8859-1] Çelik wrote: > > All this will become credible the day that a version of Explorer > > is proven to have *ignored* the O2K barf, > > I will hold you to that. Why me? Or rather, will that be me only? Is it that the comments (about IE5 being the only one with lo! *support* - imagine that, of all things...) were unwarranted here? http://www.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=547866025 It started with this: http://www.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=547866025 and also had comments like this: http://www.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=548896226 The whole thread is worth reading, IMO. In view of pieties expressed recently on this list, I find the implied contention, that MS reps don't also represent the uh, interests of parties such as The Office Team, quite disturbing - what exactly is a rep's job? "Blame the other guy"? - when I read this: : as the Microsoft alternate representative to the HTML wg, I can tell : you that *we* certainly strongly disagree with removal and/or : deprecation of the STYLE attribute. It may be better to hold me in a killfile:) Arjun
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2000 01:53:43 UTC