Re: Rethinking HTML 5 (Was: Re: Semicolon after entities)

On 1 May 2007, at 18:16, Jeff Cutsinger wrote:

>>> If HTML5 is to be backwards-compatible
>>
>> Is this a given ?  Is it even desirable ?
>
> No, it isn't a given. Yes, it is absolutely desirable. If not to you,
> then to a much larger class of developers.
>
>> And what does it really mean ? That a document
>> written in HTML5 will display  "correctly" in
>> browsers that are HTML5-unaware ?
>
> Yes.
>
>> That's
>> demonstrably impossible, unless HTML5 is
>> a strict /subset/ of earlier incarnations
>> of HTML (as opposed to superset, which an earlier
>> correspondent proposed).
>
> You are incorrect. The WHATWG specs as defined are (loosely  
> speaking) a
> superset of HTML 4 (in that they add useful features) and are also
> backwards compatible.

Hang on, you can't say "HTML5 will display  "correctly" in browsers  
that are HTML5-unaware" and then say "The WHATWG specs as defined are  
(loosely speaking) a superset of HTML 4 (in that they add useful  
features)"

Well, you clearly did, but how can you have something which is a  
superset (more features) rendering correctly in something that knows  
nothing about those new features.

It makes no sense at all.

Gareth