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

Re: legacy of incompetence? [was: a compromise to the versioning debate]

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 07:17:29 +0200
To: "Alexander Graf" <a.graf@aetherworld.org>, "Preston L. Bannister" <preston@bannister.us>
Cc: "Dailey, David P." <david.dailey@sru.edu>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tqu2bfrs64w2qv@id-c0020>

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 00:52:18 +0200, Alexander Graf  
<a.graf@aetherworld.org> wrote:
>> After writing the above, I would like to suggest another principle:
>> The HTML-next specification should be as short as possible.
>>
>> Strictly speaking, "Don't Break the Web" is a non-issue.  Existing
>> web pages will be interpreted just as they are today.  The HTML-
>> next specification only applies when the HTML-next version
>> specifier is seen by the browser.  (Just like XHTML did so [cough]
>> successfully.)
>
> +1
>
> I couldn't agree more. I don't really see any possible and at the
> same time sensible alternative.

Minus a million (can we stop doing this?!).

The WHATWG HTML5 proposal is the alternative as has been suggested over  
the past few weeks. It would be useful if you provided clear arguments on  
why that isn't a sensible alternative as your e-mail doesn't seem to add  
much to that discussion.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 16 April 2007 05:17:54 UTC

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