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

Re: Proposal to Adopt HTML5

From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:10:33 +0100
Message-ID: <461BD319.2080109@cam.ac.uk>
To: David Dailey <david.dailey@sru.edu>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

David Dailey wrote:

> b) WHATWG's origins were based in discontent with the W3C (as per its 
> FAQ). That is a discontent I have no reason to share (being new to this 
> sort of thing), but it does give cause for caution.

I think it is accurate to say that the discontent was largely with the 
fact that no backward-compatible successor to HTML4 was being developed 
at the W3C. This is clearly not the case anymore.

> d) there are things in the WHATWG proposal that I remain unconvinced of 
> and would likely argue against should those discussions become 
> appropriate. I think line-item discussion must remain possible.

I don't think anyone has ever suggested otherwise. Where you have issues 
with the content of the WHATWG document, it's worth checking the mailing 
list archive [1] for relevant discussion in case the feedback loop 
documented there contains information pertinent to your concerns.

> f) the argument that the WHATWG document is so extensively 
> interconnected that parts of it cannot be considered in isolation has 
> surfaced a couple of times. That seems to be an argument against a 
> document rather than for it to me.

The specification necessarily has interconnection between the different 
areas (e.g. the section on parsing has to know about document.write) so 
some tight coupling is a necessary consequence of the task being 
undertaken. However if we identify specific ways to make the 
specification clearer I'm confident Hixie (or any other editor) will be 
open to making the necessary changes.

[1] http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/

-- 
"Instructions to follow very carefully.
Go to Tesco's.  Go to the coffee aisle.  Look at the instant coffee. 
Notice that Kenco now comes in refil packs.  Admire the tray on the 
shelf.  It's exquiste corrugated boxiness. The way how it didn't get 
crushed on its long journey from the factory. Now pick up a refil bag. 
Admire the antioxidant claim.  Gaze in awe at the environmental claims 
written on the back of the refil bag.  Start stroking it gently, its my 
packaging precious, all mine....  Be thankful that Amy has only given 
you the highlights of the reasons why that bag is so brilliant."
-- ajs
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 18:10:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:52 GMT