W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5

From: Henrik Dvergsdal <henrik.dvergsdal@hibo.no>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:22:05 +0200
Message-Id: <FF1DFF2C-BD4D-42F5-8402-6833C1B9B031@hibo.no>
To: public-html@w3.org

OK, it looks like the people behind this proposal also agree on the  
question of version information.

So just to make sure I get this right: To me it looks like you are  
proposing the following strategy:

1. We start with HTML5 in its current state.

2. We add all all that's necessary to define "exactly how to handle  
the web as it is today" (Hunt). This means all components that are  
being used in current web pages, including, for instance, elements  
like <blink>, <blackface> and <marquee> and all the "undocumented,  
unspecified, frozen set of bugs" (Hickson) that people rely on out  
there.

3. We organize the standard into sets of "recommended", "right"   
components, and sets of forbidden, "wrong" components:

This "effectively means that we discourage people from using the  
elements (it's forbidden, the elements don't event exist as far as  
authors are concerned), but "require" user agents to support them so  
they don't lose market share, render the web and such" (van Kesteren,  
offlist).

4. We then freeze the standard and let evolve in two ways only: (1)  
by bug fixing and (2) by incorporating new components once they  
actually being used - "we cannot afford to change behavior, nor can  
we afford to remove features from browsers once they are  
used" (Hickson).  This means that if, for instance, Microsoft  
implements some new element in IE and people start using it, it will  
automatically be included in the standard and all the others will  
have to follow.

Am I right?

--
Henrik
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 09:22:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:42 UTC