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

Re: Support Existing Content (was: Proposed Design Principles review)

From: David Hyatt <hyatt@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:45:27 -0700
Message-Id: <02E2FBE0-E3EA-4BCA-A1C2-33CC1B495961@apple.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
To: tina@greytower.net

On Apr 30, 2007, at 2:30 PM, Tina Holmboe wrote:

>   Does that mean we should add FONT to the standard? The WHAT WG  
> seem to
>   think so - I disagree; as does most everyone I know who work with  
> the
>   web.

I would like the HTML standard to document the reality of the Web,  
not some idealized imaginary version of the Web.  What good is a  
standard that - if implemented by itself - results only in a toy  
browser that can't render the real Web?  How is that standard helpful  
to anyone?

>   I'm afraid that if we /do/ make HTML 5 what the browser vendors are
>   willing, able, and eager to implement then we'll not get anything
>   /other/ than what they want.

What browser vendors want is usually what Web site authors are  
telling us that they want.

>   That's not enough. We /also/ need things in the specs that browser
>   vendors might not want, or to do things in ways /they/ don't  
> want; but
>   users might still need, require, wish ... this is a two-way street.

If enough content authors want a feature, then clearly it would be of  
interest to browser vendors as well.  I'm not sure why you are  
singling out browser vendors as a unique audience.  We have no  
interest in adding features that content authors wouldn't use.  We'd  
just be bloating our products for no reason if we did that.

Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 21:46:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:19 UTC