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

RE: The argument for |bugmode| (was Re: If we have versioning, it should be in an attribute, not the doctype)

From: Matthew Ratzloff <matt@builtfromsource.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <49694.152.157.114.69.1176917934.squirrel@webmail.builtfromsource.com>
To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

On Wed, April 18, 2007 9:33 am, Chris Wilson wrote:
> I want to explicitly state - I neither asked for nor want the HTML WG to
> specify a "bugmode" attribute in HTML.  I expect bugward-compatibility
> markers to be IE-proprietary, and I hope we can get rid of them over time.

So, what are we talking about, then?

    <!--[IE 8.0]--> ?

Doesn't it stand to reason that most professional content creators will
include this on their pages in order to get the latest mode?

If the majority of pages will eventually opt in (and they will, over
time), why not make it part of the specification?  We're not talking about
introducing IE bugs into the specification.  We're talking about including
a flag that lets IE--and any other browser that sees fit to use
it--determine how to render content on that page in an opt-in way.

A version attribute does this.  It does this much better if the next
version of HTML after 5.0 isn't 6.0, but 5.01, 5.1, etc.

I feel strongly that there should be an opt-in of some kind.  However, I
don't necessarily feel strongly about whether it should be a version
attribute or a proprietary comment.  I suppose a proprietary comment would
be the most amenable solution for all involved, and may in the end be the
better solution.

>  I DO want the HTML WG to recognize that they cannot be ripped out today
> (or for the next several years).

I agree, if "several" means "10 to 15".

-Matt
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2007 17:46:18 GMT

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