- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 11:10:35 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jon Ferraiolo <jonf@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3c.org
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Jon Ferraiolo wrote: > > Implementers and content developers have requested this feature and are > satisfied with the functionality, so we are going to keep it. This (obviously) doesn't ssatisfy my request. Please ensure that my objection is clearly marked in your disposition of comments. In addition, please respond with a substantial technical reason for why the SVG WG feels it is appropriate to reinvent the wheel in this case, given that this is a feature that is redundant with two of the W3C's oldest and most widely used specifications. I have yet to receive such a response, which is required by W3C process. > Also, <textArea> is not a new feature with the 3rd Last Call, so your > comment is out of the scope of feedback which we have solicited. The 3rd > Last Call was announced with the following words: "The purpose of this > third Last Call is to allow reviewers to verify that their comments have > been included as agreed by the SVG Working Group, it is not intended as > a new, general review period." The SVG working group's quite entertaining interpretation of the W3C process is not something I am interested in discussing. In any case, even if the SVG group could really limit feedback in this quite ridiculous way, my feedback was specifically within the SVG working group's purported scope, since it was a continutation of an issue I raised in previous last calls which had not been resolved (namely, SVG12-207). Indeed, such comments were never even formally responded to by the SVG group, as Bjoern pointed out in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2006Mar/0015 -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 3 March 2006 11:10:52 UTC