- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 12:11:53 -0500
- To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, smontagu@smontagu.org, GĂ©rard Talbot <css21testsuite@gtalbot.org>
On 01/28/2015 08:52 AM, Koji Ishii wrote: > The problem of leaving it as at-risk is that another shorter value, > "sideways", has a dependency on the at-risk value, and thus is a > possible source of an interoperability problem. > > I prefer deferring earlier than later. Doing so saves test costs as well. Then we mark both at-risk together, and clarify that implementers are only allowed to implement 'sideways' if they implement it according to the actual definition in the spec and not the one in their head. :) ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2015 17:12:31 UTC