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

Re: A Compromise to the Versioning Debate

From: liorean <liorean@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 17:07:11 +0200
Message-ID: <cee13aa30704210807k2b03387ch5b69ec6358627bde@mail.gmail.com>
To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
> Matthew Raymond schrieb:
> >    I agree about having space-separated strings to allow bug modes for
> > multiple vendors.

On 21/04/07, Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de> wrote:
> I don't. We want user agents to be interoperable. It's unlikely that IEx
> will support the FooBrowser7 bugmode, for example.

That's not how bugmodes would work. Bugmodes are more like authors
saying "this page is written to work in this bugmode, so if you
support it, use it". Bugmodes aren't orthogonal. Should more browsers
than IE choose to use bugmodes, those browsers may very well have
bugmodes that are entirely incompatible with the bugmodes of IE.
However, by specifying more than one bugmode an author can tell
several browsers (or different versions of the same browser) that it's
written to work in any of those modes.

> > While HTML versions and
> > browser versions can't necessarily be synchronous, browsers can't really
> > support future versions of HTML.
>
> That's one reason for making HTML forward compatible and future versions
> of HTML backward compatible.

Well, HTML is not really the problem. Sure, there are
incompatibilities in the HTML parsing too, but those could probably be
fixed with a single mode switch. The bugmodes would cover
implementations of CSS, DOM, HTTP and other technologies as well as
HTML.
-- 
David "liorean" Andersson
Received on Saturday, 21 April 2007 15:07:15 GMT

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