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

Re: The argument for |bugmode|

From: Patrick Taylor <patrick@healtheconomics.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:25:57 -0300
Message-Id: <665C992A-48F3-4CE9-B776-B7055D497971@healtheconomics.org>
Cc: public-html@w3.org, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>


On 20-Apr-07, at 4:26 AM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

> Patrick Taylor wrote:
>> Isn't the question of what to default to an implementation detail  
>> for the UA developers?
>
> It's one that can have seriously adverse affects on the future of  
> web development.

Lachlan, I don't disagree with you but it may also be a question  
where we have to be pragmatic and accept that it will have to be  
solved outside of the HTML WG (or WHATWG or whatever organization).

Writing a spec doesn't solve interoperability problems, there has to  
be good faith buy-in from all the participants and if they don't,  
then we may have a spec that is more useful as budgie cage liner.


>> *  Microsoft (or whomever else wants) can use it for their opt-in,  
>> and, in the absence of the version attribute, default to html5 or  
>> html6 or almost standards mode or whatever if they choose.
>> *  Apple, Mozilla, Opera, etc can choose to ignore it and default  
>> to Latest Standard mode whether it is there or not.
>> *  Web authors will do what they've always done and work around  
>> the implementations.
>
> That does not help interoperability at all.  It's precisely the  
> situation we need to avoid in the future.

As opposed to Microsoft developing a non-standard way of opting-in?   
I don't think Chris Wilson is trying to be obtuse, he doesn't seem to  
feel that he can sell it to his bosses. Chris Wilson might agree with  
you but Chris Wilson (Microsoft) doesn't.

I don't expect the HTML WG to solve my IE problems. We are not the  
WTO, the SEC or the EU Competition Commission, we are not chartered  
to bend Microsoft to our knee.


>> If it doesn't already exist, I also propose the design principle:  
>> "The Spec cannot solve all problems".
>
> That's not an acceptable design principle, it's just another way of  
> saying give up.

It was mostly tongue-in-cheek, but maybe it is something we should  
take to heart. This is a consensus organization and not everyone is  
going to get their way, no matter how crucial they might think their  
point is. Sometimes it will be you and sometimes it will be Chris  
(and sometimes, please, let it be me).

I just don't think that we will be able to get Microsoft to ignore  
their (real or perceived) market demands by badgering Chris Wilson  
and holding the equivalent of "The Argument Sketch" via email.


cheers,
Patrick
Received on Friday, 20 April 2007 12:26:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:43 UTC