- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 06 May 2007 11:55:41 +0200
- To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>
- Cc: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, 06 May 2007 11:27:33 +0200, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > Hmm.. come to think of it. It's quite a pity that that is what the > charter says. Would have been better to say that the language should > have been based on the markup that is currently used on the internet. > Too bad we didn't think of that earlier. FWIW, the deliverables section our charter http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#deliverables does mention: "A serialized form of such a language using a defined, non-XML syntax compatible with the 'classic HTML' parsers of existing Web browsers." which sort of addresses that point I think. (Which actually also addresses all the debate about draconian versus non-draconian handling come to think of it...) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Sunday, 6 May 2007 09:56:01 UTC