- From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 13:06:10 -0700
- To: "'Henri Sivonen'" <hsivonen@iki.fi>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "'HTMLWG WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'Maciej Stachowiak'" <mjs@apple.com>
> On the topic of the strength of objections: Larry's > concern about progress to REC could be used as an excuse > to delete anything proactively. However, we don't need to > because the Process already involves pruning features > without implementations before in later transitions It isn't "Larry's concern", it's a concern which should be shared by any responsible group working on standards. It isn't an "excuse", it is a rationale. It isn't a "delete", its holding off on adding something until the specification and implementations are baked and "match reality" -- a threshold which has been applied liberally to HTML4 features which actually *have* been deleted. The argument wasn't about "anything", it was about one specific addition which seems to still not be completely baked. And it wasn't "proactive", it was reactive, based on review, implementation status, and specification in the document. Please evaluate the argument on its merits, rather than this false bogeyman. Thanks, Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Wednesday, 19 May 2010 20:06:49 UTC