- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 15:53:08 -0400
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:54 AM, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: > On 18/03/15 07:09, Tantek Çelik wrote: > >> Regardless, we CANNOT add a MUST requirement of an aspect (i.e. >> format) a feature that is defined in a spec which we are unable to >> normatively reference (lack of open spec), and since there is no open >> spec for .ico and .cur, we are unable to normatively reference them. >> >> This is based on W3C rules for normative references - and we may not >> even be able to publish an updated draft if we attempt to normatively >> reference something that violates W3C's referencing policy. >> >> It doesn't matter if you or the whole group thinks we should >> normatively reference a non-open spec - W3C publishing / process will >> reject it. > > > That's correct. > > But we could at least add an informal note to the spec saying > that cur and ico are the two interoperable formats implemented by all > engines at the time of publication of the document I am in favor of this as it is a factual note. > and that all new > implementations are strongly encouraged to implement them too. I'm not sure about "strongly". Even though it is a note (especially because it's a note?) I'd still prefer a should, something like. New implementations should consider implementing them as well. > I am then asking Microsoft to provide the WG with authoritative and > stable URLs containing specification of cur and ico formats we could > use as informative reference. If there are no such documents, create > them? For now I suggest this as informative reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICO_%28file_format%29 I'd like to make this edit ASAP, however I heard via IRC that we are waiting per request from Rossen to hear back from him / Microsoft? Thanks, Tantek
Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 19:54:24 UTC