- From: Laura Carlson <laura.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 09:55:39 -0500
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> Patrick H. Lauke wrote: >> I'm making the point that the onus should have been on those who >> omitted the attributes from the spec to show that they're not >> needed, rather than us having to prove that they are needed... > Lachlan Hunt wrote: > No, that's backwards. Nothing gets added or retained without some > evidence that it's needed. Is there a rationale document that provides evidence [1] for the HTML 5 spec (previously WHAT WG's proposal) that is up for review for the HTML WG? Reasoning for what is currently included may help provide some insight to WG members and other interested parties. Thanks, Laura [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2007May/0419.html > * What are the use cases? > * What problems it solves and how? > * Who benefits and how? > * The incentive that authors will have to actually use it. > * How it could be implemented. > * The incentive that UA vendors have to implement it. ___________________________________________ Laura L. Carlson Information Technology Systems and Services University of Minnesota Duluth Duluth, MN U.S.A. 55812-3009 http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/webdesign/
Received on Monday, 14 May 2007 18:03:15 UTC