W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2013

Re: ACTION-782: Polyglot discussion at upcoming TAG F2F

From: Yehuda Katz <yehuda.katz@jquery.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 17:10:36 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMFeDTVzXR7_72_mL+=sRDo670HJ14cwJ3wSSi=HzSJ2DHSNTQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
Cc: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>wrote:

> On 3/10/2013 4:39 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>> My goal was just to get a face-to-face discussion about this so that
>> passionate supporters of using TAG time for this could make their case. I
>> believe that several of the new members do not see this as a good use of
>> TAG's limited time, but wanted to give longer-standing members an
>> opportunity to disabuse us of that.
> I'm fine with the spirit of this, though am wondering if the details are
> backward. The TAG has made a request to the HTML working group that the
> polyglot document move forward. If we spend no time on it, the TAG's
> position on that stands. My impression was that it was some or perhaps all
> of our "new members" who felt it might be worth time to reconsider the
> TAG's position, and I'm willing to schedule some time if so. What am I
> missing? Thank you.

I believe that Alex and I both expressed our suspicion that this particular
discussion served as a reasonable proxy for other seeming disagreements,
and we wanted to use a concrete point of controversy in order to raise the
discussion. I believe that other members (maybe Jeni) agreed that it could
be a useful way to have a much-needed discussion.

> Noah

Yehuda Katz
(ph) 718.877.1325
Received on Sunday, 10 March 2013 21:11:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:54 UTC