- From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:50:04 -0800 (PST)
- To: "'Matt May'" <mattmay@adobe.com>, "'David Singer'" <singer@apple.com>
- Cc: "'Maciej Stachowiak'" <mjs@apple.com>, "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <chaals@opera.com>, "'Jonas Sicking'" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "'HTMLwg WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
Matt May wrote: > On the proposal itself, I am, like Chaals, more positive about it than > other proposals I've seen. > I was preparing a longer response to this thread, but at this point in time will opt instead of echoing both Chaals and Matt in saying that this might be acceptable - like others I suspect that the devil will be in the details - specifically the warning advisory that we issue to authors. Phrased in the context that authors should be aware that there *might* be a better technique to achieve this goal exists is an acceptable position. However telling them that using @longdesc is *WRONG* would be unacceptable IMHO. JF
Received on Tuesday, 23 February 2010 00:50:41 UTC