group. Then HTML5 might
not be a good brand [1].
[1]
http://www.2ality.com/2011/01/branding-web-technologies-and-new-html5.html
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Philippe,
Logos look nice! however, I'm baffled as to why HTML5 logo site mix in
things like WebGL and CSS
.2ality.com/2011/01/branding-web-technologies-and-new-html5.html
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Philippe,
Logos look nice! however, I'm baffled as to why HTML5 logo site mix in
things like WebGL and CSS 3, which are clearly not part of the HTML
Standard (as it is now
On 1/23/11 6:31 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
Ian has, for quite some tine, described his whatwg document as HTML
Next, a 'living' standard.
Yes, we did the same with W3C Widgets. We dropped versioning and
(unsuccessfully) requested the W3C to change its process to allow the
latest version to
Hi Philippe,
Logos look nice! however, I'm baffled as to why HTML5 logo site mix in
things like WebGL and CSS 3, which are clearly not part of the HTML
Standard (as it is now known;))? Who made the choice of what
technologes were to be included or excluded from the set of
technologies that make
://www.2ality.com/2011/01/branding-web-technologies-and-new-html5.html
On Jan 23, 2011, at 4:49 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Philippe,
Logos look nice! however, I'm baffled as to why HTML5 logo site mix in
things like WebGL and CSS 3, which are clearly not part of the HTML
Standard (as it is now
