Re: [CSSWG] Agenda conf call 29-feb-2012

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Daniel Glazman
<daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
> Le 29/02/12 17:46, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Daniel Glazman
>> <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 28/02/12 22:49, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> If we do, we should broaden it to all non-W3C references, like RFCs,
>>>> which we definitely refer to in some places.
>>>
>>> FIWI, RFCs are a bit different here: W3C does not have working groups
>>> on same topics and specs of same names...
>>
>> Irrelevant; the concern is with patents, not politics.
>
> Don't tell _me_ that. The CSS WG is still a W3C WG, and W3C does
> have some rules.

I don't think the W3C has any rule that says "Thou shalt not refer to
the WHATWG version of HTML." ^_^

~TJ

Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 17:02:38 UTC