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

Re: Formal definition of HTML5 (was Re: Version information)

From: Joe D'Andrea <jdandrea@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:15:18 -0400
Message-Id: <FC2CDC7B-CD2F-4468-95CD-75847D7B5F62@gmail.com>
To: public-html@w3.org

At 14:49 PM 4/16/2007, David Dailey wrote:

 > This pixel-perfect discussion has left me a bit confused.

Ditto. Retracing steps now ... here's what I have so far:

Anne van Kesteren:

 > HTML5 defines an exact way to generate conforming documents in
 > prose and an exact way to interpret a resource with a text/html
 > MIME type (also in prose).

Chris Wilson:

 > Umm, I think "exact" is a very strong word for what the prose of
 > HTML5 does.

Ian Hickson:

 > Could you give any concrete examples of vagueness? I'd like to fix
 > any that are unintentional.

Chris Wilson:

 > <canvas>.  You've specified an entire immediate-mode graphics api,
 > more extensive in some ways than GDI, without describing the
 > parameters or giving rendering rules to get interoperable
 > pixel-perfect rendering.

Ian Hickson:

 > Could you be more specific? What parameters do you think should be
 > specified and which rendering rules do you think are needed to get
 > interoperable pixel-perfect rendering?

T.V Raman:

 > If we're talking about HTML producing pixel perfect rendering,
 > then I suggest it's time to press the reset button -- that was
 > never HTML's goal, and nor should it ever become its goal.

Chris Wilson:

 > I agree, but then I don't think it's rational to put a graphics
 > API in the middle of the HTML spec.

My takeaway thus far:

<canvas> should not define pixel-perfect rendering, nor does it.

--
Joe D'Andrea
www.joesapt.net
Received on Monday, 16 April 2007 19:15:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:15:53 GMT