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

Re: Versioning re-visited (was : mixed signals on "Writing HTML documents", tutorial, etc.)

From: Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:34:35 -0400
To: HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C2A574EB.2EDE%maurice@thymeonline.com>

On 6/23/07 3:14 PM, "Craig Francis" <craig@synergycms.com> wrote:

> 
> On 23 Jun 2007, at 18:56, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
> 
>> I think the whole point of the design idea, proposed by Ian, et al. is
>> to develop a forward _and_ backward compatible language, where the
>> documents, written in HTML5 are also HTML6 documents.. unless I am
>> misunderstanding something.
>> 
>> By inference, this means that subtraction or replacement of language
>> features in a previous version are not allowed in the next version.
>> Ian, Anne, is this correct?
>> 
> 
> 
> If that is the case, then why are they making subtractions and
> replacement of language features in this revision?
> 
> After HTML5, I am sure there will be improvements that can be made
> for HTML6... and those improvements may well include the removal of
> elements/attributes.
> 
> Craig
> 
> 


Don't really think of it as true removal. Everything that already exists
must continue to be supported by the browsers. But any new content in the
future should be written to the modern standard which will have deprecated
some things from the old version. But that in no way means those old tags
are not going to be supported by the future browsers. They have to be.

It's up to the author to decide if they're going to build a web app with
doctype-less html4 markup that doesn't validate in a future where IE fully
supports html5 and everyone else is moving towards html6.

Sure they could build it that way and the error handling instructions put
into html5 should mean that it will work fine in all browsers. But just like
I find working with the standards to be 10x easier than not working with
them, I'm sure working with html5 in 2010 will be a lot easier and sensible
than hacking together crap in the old 2005 authoring style.

At least that's the way I'm understanding it so far.
Am I wrong?

-- 
::   thyme online ltd
::   po box cb13650  nassau  the bahamas
::   website: http://www.thymeonline.com/
::   tel: 242 327-1864  fax: 242 377 1038
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 17:52:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:45 UTC