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

Re: [public-html] <none>

From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:40:20 +0100
To: W3C List <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070427144020.GA13097@stripey.com>

Gareth Hay writes:

> On 27 Apr 2007, at 15:04, Jeff Cutsinger wrote:
> 
> > Gareth Hay wrote:
> > 
> > > html5 pages. Creating an HTML5 only browser frees us of the legacy
> > > nonsense. (as that is effectively what would be happening)
> > > 
> > > It's not as if we are going to remove legacy browsers as new HTML5
> > > browsers come along.  I don't think it is realistic to have one
> > > browser to render 100%  of the web. It's just not, so let's get
> > > with the program that will give  us this solution in a reasonable
> > > amount of time.
> > 
> > Great! I love the idea of using 10 different programs to browse the  
> > web!
> 
> I'm only asking you keep your current Firefox, and then use the new
> Standards browser, or as I may have suggested, Have 1 browser with 2
> different modes - but do it properly,

Surely doing it properly involves differing browsers treating the
content in the same way -- in which case it makes sense for there to be
a document describing what way that is?

> So if we live in your reality, ... we have to write browser to parse
> EVERY html ever, even if badly written

Yes.  Or, rather, any implementation of a web browser is going to have
to cope with being told 'render this HTML document' where the document
could contain absolutely anything at all.

One thing such a browser could do is try to validate the document as
HTML5, and if it isn't simply display a message telling the user to use
an older browser.

But more realistically, it's going to try to render the document.  So
the specification should say what a conforming HTML5 user-agent should
do with such input.

> After all, it's not like MS ever releases new versions of it's
> products that require you to import and re-save old documents is it?
> Why is the web exempt from this process?

Why should it settle for it, if we can do better?

But there are differences, not least that the web is more open than the
proprietary format of one particular software manufacturer.

> Why are you striving for what can at most be a complete mess?

Why would it be a complete mess for all HTML5-implementing user-agents
to treat all input in the same way as each other?

Smylers
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 14:40:22 UTC

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