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

Re: 3.6. The root element

From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:49:22 +0100
Message-ID: <46ADEC62.7060709@cam.ac.uk>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

Anne van Kesteren wrote:

>> I hope it's becoming clear how confusing these implementation
>> specifics will be for authors, how they get in the way of
>> understanding the markup rules. I appreciate they all have a purpose,
>> but I'd rather those details were stuffed in appendices where I'd only
>> encounter them if I really dug into details.
> 
> Specifications are meant to cover the nasty little details. If a 
> specification were just an authoring guide it wouldn't be of much use to 
> picky authors who'd like to know how things are actually working. You'd 
> just have another HTML 4.

Authors seem to be comfortable with the level of the HTML specification although 
it it clearly not up to the task of making interoperable implementations. I've 
previously suggested that the WG could write a non-normative document at the 
level of HTML 4; I think the process of doing this would be useful to the WG and 
the result would be useful to authors. I envision a wiki setup with WG members 
signing up to write the initial content for various sections of the document, 
followed by review and finally an effort to pull it together into a publishable 
Note.

Assuming I have some time to do the meta-work for the creation of this document 
(style guides, sign up sheets, etc.), where would be the most appropriate place 
to host it? Should we reuse the ESW wiki or shall I set up something else?

-- 
"Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?"
  -- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 13:49:37 GMT

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