Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
mozilla.dev.platform
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion An alternate take on HTML5
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
rubys  
View profile  
 More options Feb 19 2009, 8:39 am
Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.platform
From: rubys <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:39:37 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Feb 19 2009 8:39 am
Subject: Re: An alternate take on HTML5
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Feb 19, 5:16 am, Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@iki.fi> wrote:

> In article
> <6361100b-0d05-4f86-b3d5-87f580073...@n20g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,

>  sayrer <say...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 18, 5:50 am, Henri Sivonen <hsivo...@iki.fi> wrote:

> > > I have trouble deciding what I think without knowing what the purpose of
> > > your document is. What's the goal you are trying to achieve and why?

> > To publish a document with well defined error handling and a very
> > select few new features, quickly.

> Publish in what way? HTML 5 as it exists on any given day is already
> published in the sense that it is public and anyone can GET in and read
> it freely.

And contains a number of things that have no consensus and others that
will change tomorrow.

You raise a number of valid points on Rob's document.  Perhaps it
could be approached in a different way, and I encourage people to try
(I will say that doing so is much harder than it might appear to be).
But Rob's effort makes it much easier for people like me to pose the
following question:

If you look at the list of sections that Rob cut, do we, as a group,
have consensus that we want to include each and every last one of
those in the draft we put forward for Last Call this fall, and are we
confident that we will have zero open issues on each by that time?

- Sam Ruby


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google