[whatwg] Style sheet loading and parsing (over HTTP)

Anne van Kesteren annevk at opera.com
Thu May 24 00:50:47 PDT 2007

On Thu, 24 May 2007 02:33:46 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs at malform.no>  
> The WHATwg spec has become the starting-point. Victory, said Anne van.  
> Sounds more like Ian think the HTMLwg is a drag. Anne tells in his blog  
> how he presents HTML5 to different audiences. And Karl Dubost began  
> speaking about tutorial for users. But who needs a tutorial here, if not  
> the HTMLwg itself? Doesn't the WHATwg spec as starting point mean that  
> WHATwg somehow have been given a responsibility here? To present its  
> spec to the _HTMLwg_? Section for section. After all, you wanted the  
> HTMLwg to accept it. And you therfore are obligued to present it - and  
> deserve the space and time to do so. It is really difficult to discuss  
> small bits such as class names unless we have a broader context.

The HTML WG accepted to review the HTML 5 proposal. Presumably members of  
the HTML WG are doing that. I'm not sure why they would need tutorials as  
well to do such a thing.

> On 2007-05-23 23:20:40 +0200 Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> replied to  
> Julian:
>> If the spec I'm working on isn't that spec, then I'll stop working on  
>> it, and return to working on the spec with real-world relevance.)
> I think many would feel that the whole process would pretty much falls  
> apart if this should happen. On the other side, it doesn't sound as if  
> you are open to much debate. You better think about how you present this  
> to the HTMLwg. No one likes to discuss under a Damocles sword. On the  
> other side, it is just fair to say that there are some limites on what  
> one can accept. But then again, the HTMLwg has been conveened pretty  
> much because of WHATwg - so it would be a bit strange.

I think the fundamentals of the specification are not really up for  
debate. It has to be compatible with the web.

Anne van Kesteren

More information about the whatwg mailing list