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

Re: mixed signals on "Writing HTML documents", tutorial, etc.

From: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 08:42:14 +0100
Message-ID: <467788D6.3040608@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
CC: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>, Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>

Henri Sivonen wrote:

 > Either HTML 6 will be compatible so that it doesn't need to tell itself
 > apart from HTML5. If the people who define HTML 6 in the future don't
 > have the good sense to make their spec compatible, surely we can trust
 > them to have the good sense to introduce a version discriminator then.

How /can/ HTML 6 be "compatible" in the sense that a validator would
understand the term ?  Either a document is HTML 5 or it is HTML 6
(or it is something else); it cannot be both HTML 5 /and/ HTML 6 unless
HTML 6 neither adds to, nor eliminates from, HTML 5, in which case
there would be little if any reason to introduce it.

Until recently, I would have been more than happy to trust the
future developers of HTML 6, based on all previous experience : but
recent experience /in re/ HTML 5 suggests to me that there are some
who see no merit whatsoever in version discrimination and who believe
that <!doctype html> is sufficient.  If these same people are involved
in the specification of HTML 6, why should I believe that they will once
again discover the merits of version discrimination when at the moment they
seem blind to such benefits?  And on the other hand, if these merits
are so obvious to you and I, why does the putative HTML 5 specification not
already set an appropriate precedent such as :


at the very least ?

Philip Taylor
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 07:43:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:22 UTC