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

Re: Neutrality in "HTML 5 differences from HTML 4"

From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:02:24 +0100
Message-ID: <468AAB50.1060503@cam.ac.uk>
To: "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Cc: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>

Philip Taylor (Webmaster) wrote:
> 
> 
> James Graham wrote:
> 
>> I am concerned that this working group may quickly gain a reputation 
>> for being dysfunctional if we are not able to produce any 
>> deliverables. If publishing a simple factual precis of the differences 
>> between HTML4 and the current HTML 5 draft is this hard, I cannot 
>> imagine the working group will ever agree on something substantial 
>> like publishing an actual spec.
> 
> I think that is a very realistic appraisal, and not one that
> fills me with unmitigated horror.  At the moment, I simply
> cannot see HTML 5 [1] as a step forward; a step sideways, yes --
> in some ways better than HTML 4.01, in some ways poorer.

In that case I cannot imagine what issues you would have with 
publishing a document likely to motivate more people to get involved 
with improving HTML 5.

> But if we cannot agree a specification that 98.5%+ of us agree
> is indisputably /better/ than HTML 4.01, then in my honest
> opinion it is better that we publish nothing.

I have great difficulty believing that it is possible to reach that 
level of agreement on _anything_ (HTML related or not) in a group this 
size and that trying to do so might make the WG less relevant than it 
would otherwise be. However I don't understand how this issue is at-all 
related to the publishing of a work-in-progress document designed to 
help people understand the current state of the spec and contribute 
their expertise to it.

-- 
"Instructions to follow very carefully.
Go to Tesco's.  Go to the coffee aisle.  Look at the instant coffee. 
Notice that Kenco now comes in refil packs.  Admire the tray on the 
shelf.  It's exquiste corrugated boxiness. The way how it didn't get 
crushed on its long journey from the factory. Now pick up a refil bag. 
Admire the antioxidant claim.  Gaze in awe at the environmental claims 
written on the back of the refil bag.  Start stroking it gently, its my 
packaging precious, all mine....  Be thankful that Amy has only given 
you the highlights of the reasons why that bag is so brilliant."
-- ajs
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2007 20:02:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:02 GMT