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

Re: conflation of issues or convergence of interests?

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:48:30 +0200
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, public-html@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tv6gm4vx64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 15:34:03 +0200, Patrick H. Lauke  
<redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
> My response was directly related to your "different architecture"  
> statement, assuming that you meant "architecture of the language" rather  
> than "architecture of current practices". But it seems that you were  
> indeed referring to the latter.

Indeed.


> Again, this seems disingenuous to me...let's not look at HTML 4's  
> language constructs when devising new elements, but rather look at how  
> current sites have (ab)used the markup at this point in time.

This seems most useful for everyone involved. Ignoring what people are  
doing just leads to design that isn't likely to be adopted as it doesn't  
suit the needs of authors. It also doesn't help users as software that  
would conform to HTML 4 wouldn't be able to render the web (at all).


> As was noted before, even if a large percentage of sites/authors here  
> and now don't take advantage of an HTML 4 language feature, that doesn't  
> necessarily mean that the feature should be scrapped...but I guess  
> that's really the crux of this argument.

Oh, I agree with that. I'm just arguing that it's important to take  
existing usage into account (which has been done for most if not all of  
the features currently in HTML 5).


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Saturday, 28 July 2007 13:49:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:47 UTC