- From: Dão Gottwald <dao@design-noir.de>
- Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:20:47 +0200
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, public-html@w3.org
Jonas Sicking schrieb: > > David Hyatt wrote: >> >> Versioning is like a vendor-neutral opt-in hook. Browsers can then >> use their own opt-in hooks and use the vendor-neutral hook once they >> are confident in their compliance with the spec. Theoretically IE >> might do something like this with my proposal: >> >> IE 8 ships with partial HTML5 support, uses custom opt-in #1 >> IE8.1 ships with more complete HTML5 support, uses custom opt-in #2 >> IE9 is the point where MSFT decides they've nailed it, now they use >> the HTML5 version as opt-in #3 >> IE9.1 starts adding more features for future HTML versions or maybe >> has to tweak existing HTML5 a tiny bit to deal with some quirks, uses >> custom opt-in #4 > > I don't think this will work. What would probably happen is that before > IE9 (in the example above) ships there will be tons of HTML5 documents > that doesn't use any IE opt-in switches authored and put up on the web. > Microsoft will unlikely be willing to all of a sudden switch rendering > mode on all those documents and would instead require opt-in #3 to be > some custom switch. If sites don't use the IE 8 opt-in, IE 8 wouldn't support any of their HTML 5 features. Why should any relevant site afford that? Sites will mist likely a) stick with HTML 4, b) use the IE 8 opt-in or c) not care about IE at all. --Dao
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 08:21:04 UTC