The editor's response is fine but why is it asking me to escalate the
issue to the "HTML" WG? The specs are being discussed in the WebApps WG.
Nikunj
On Oct 21, 2009, at 2:09 AM, [email protected] wrote:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7938
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <[email protected]> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |[email protected]
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <[email protected]> 2009-10-21
09:09:45 ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If
you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to
CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to
reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full
HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug,
and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker
issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this
document:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html
Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: QUOTA_EXCEEDED_ERR makes sense when you're trying to _set_
something, because disabling setting is like making the quota zero.
SECURITY_ERR makes sense when _opening_ something, because that's
what's used
on the platform consistently for that kind of error. I think making
these two
consistent would be inappropriate.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Nikunj
http://o-micron.blogspot.com
