W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: New requirement - Simplifying Meta Data Profile

From: Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 17:06:20 +0100
Message-Id: <78B4292B-F2AA-4D72-AD07-53F24B170799@gmx.de>
To: public-html@w3.org

Am 16.03.2007 um 17:07 schrieb Denis Boudreau (WebConforme):

> Hi people,
>
>
>
>> The cost of changing HTML is very, very high. Writing specs is a  
>> tiny part of it. There's also testing and coding. But even those  
>> are mostly one-time efforts. The biggest cost
>> I see is training. Consider the cost of updating all the books and  
>> course materials on HTML. I gather it takes 3 times as long to  
>> change a habit as to make one, and there are already established  
>> habits and tools around the <meta> element.
>>
>>
>
> Extremely valid point. Considering this then, what are the  
> parameters within which are we planning to "reform" HTML?
> To me, there can hardly be a more severe shift than the one that  
> occured when XHTML 2.0 came out, compared to version 1.0 - in terms  
> of costs and collateral impacts, this seems a lot tougher than  
> considering changes to the meta element, isn't it?
>

Dan, Chris, i totally agree with you in this point. This argument  
seems to me one of the most important things, why XHTML lacks so far  
a widely acceptance of the users. The differences in writing the  
code, the discipline in writing valid code isn't still there, the  
deeper insight in doing so is still not widely accepted by those  
people, by those firms, who are responsible for writing content or  
presenting it online (for example many web agencies and advertising  
agencies). They first look to the efforts/costs/TCO and the needs of  
their customers, and then they look to the web standards which should  
but don't really need to be complied with (economically seen). There  
are still a lot of thick boards to be drilled. There is a crowd of  
people and content deliverers out there, who still stick to HTML 3.2,  
not even HTML 4.01, and the tag soup, which has been normal at that  
time, HTML 3.2 was up to date.
To explain those people to use XHTML 1, HTML5, XHTML 2 or any new (X) 
HTML whatever will be a lot of hard work to do. The teaching and  
learning industry will be glad... :-)


Sierk

-- 
Sierk Bornemann | Germany
email:            sierkb@gmx.de
WWW:              http://sierkbornemann.de/
Received on Saturday, 17 March 2007 16:06:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 17 March 2007 16:06:29 GMT