I agree with Ian's other observations/comments.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What I don't really understand, though, is why any of this is needed at
all. What value is the W3C adding by creating these forks?
In the end (dunno when that will be), patent
(12/11/26 21:25), Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I agree with Ian's other observations/comments.
I suppose that doesn't include
(12/11/24 5:22), Ian Hickson wrote:
Also, the document asks for feedback on the public-webapps list, but
that fragments feedback on the spec; the WHATWG copy instead
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu
kangh...@oupeng.com wrote:
(12/11/24 5:22), Ian Hickson wrote:
Also, the document asks for feedback on the public-webapps list, but
that fragments feedback on the spec; the WHATWG copy instead suggests
feedback go to the WHATWG list.
?
(12/11/26 22:11), Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
(12/11/26 21:25), Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I agree with Ian's other observations/comments.
I suppose that doesn't include
(12/11/24 5:22), Ian Hickson wrote:
Also, the document asks for feedback on the public-webapps list, but
that fragments
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
I agree with Ian's other observations/comments.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What I don't really understand, though, is why any of this is needed
at all. What value is the W3C adding by creating these
Warning. This discussion seems by and large non-technical bike-shedding for political purposes, which I have tried to stay away from. But some important points are drowning in rhetorical over the several threads that have dealt with this "issue".In particular I note consensus that we don't want
[ Sorry for the delayed response, I was choking on some turkey ... ]
Here's what I did for the URL spec re the boilerplate to help address
the attribution issue re Anne and WHATWG:
[[
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/url/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
This Version:
Is Anne the *sole* author? Did the WG or others not contribute any text or
suggested text to the spec? It seems like a bit of a slippery slope to
attempt to designate a sole author for any W3C product. You might want to
check with the pubs team on this matter.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:44 AM,
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Here's what I did for the URL spec re the boilerplate to help address
the attribution issue re Anne and WHATWG:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/url/raw-file/tip/Overview.html [...]
That's pretty good, though the Status of this Document boilerplate other
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What I don't really understand, though, is why any of this is needed at
all. What value is the W3C adding by creating these forks?
The problem as I see it is that the WHATWG documents are living documents
and never final per
On Fri, 23 Nov 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
What I don't really understand, though, is why any of this is needed
at all. What value is the W3C adding by creating these forks?
The problem as I see it is that the WHATWG
11 matches
Mail list logo
