- From: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:49:24 -0500
- To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
- Cc: "scott lewis" <sfl@scotfl.ca>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Martijn <martijn.martijn@gmail.com>
The HTML 4.01 spec says "Deprecated elements may become obsolete in future versions of HTML." [1] and "An obsolete element ... is one for which there is no guarantee of support by a user agent." [2] Will there ever come a day when nonconforming elements from old HTML versions are no longer guaranteed to be supported by conforming user agents? My guess is "no" if we want HTML written in 1996 to be readable in 2096, right? If so, then "nonconforming" does not mean "deprecated", really. At first, it seems odd to say that an element like <tt> or <strike> prevents a document from being "conforming HTML5", yet "conforming HTML5 user agents" must support it. The note at http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#conformance clarifies, but it still feels to me like we should be splitting the specification into two parts (i.e. one smaller spec for authors, one much larger set for all the user agent requirements). I know some people have said that the majority of web authors don't go to the specs, but what about those that do? Jeff [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/conform.html#deprecated [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/conform.html#didx-obsolete On 6/25/07, Martijn <martijn.martijn@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2007/6/25, scott lewis <sfl@scotfl.ca>: > > HTML5 consumers will be required to recognize @style and handle it in > > a manner consistent with how it is handled today. The change is that > > producers of conforming HTML5 will be prevented from using it. All > > existing documents will continue to be rendered as they are now -- > > that is why HTML5 is compatible with legacy content. > > So not conforming is the same as what deprecated is in html4? > > Regards, > Martijn > >
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 18:49:34 UTC