[Bug 11540] The willful violation clause is most unwise. A standard should not violate another standard for any reason. This wouls lead to 2 things : 1) Content correctly encoded content would never be displayed correctly. 2) All future standards would need to includ

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11540

--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> 2010-12-13 11:43:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> A standard should not violate another standard for any reason.

Why not? What if the violated standard is harmful or erroneous? 

> This wouls lead to 2 things : 1) Content
> correctly encoded content would never be displayed correctly.

Market forces, not HTML5, force browsers to provide access to the current web
corpus by violating the HTTP spec. If HTML5 complied with the HTTP spec, market
forces would still force them to provide access to the web corpus, so
/theoretically/ correctly encoded content would still be displayed incorrectly,
as you put it.

> 2) All future
> standards would need to include the same clause, making them more complex and
> weakening the standards defining the charsets.

Accurately describing the interoperable behavior required for usefulness (in
this case, access to the web corpus) strengthens rather than weakens standards:

"an Internet Standard is a specification that is stable and well-understood, is
technically competent, has multiple, independent, and interoperable
implementations with substantial operational experience, enjoys significant
public support, and is recognizably useful in some or all parts of the
Internet."

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-1.1

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Monday, 13 December 2010 11:43:15 UTC