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

RE: Cleaning House

From: Lee Roberts <lee_roberts@roserockdesign.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 12:35:58 -0500
To: <www-html@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00e201c78da9$834783c0$89d68b40$@com>

As others and I have already stated, we need to think about tomorrow and stop thinking about how things work today.  This standard won't be released for about 3 years.  No one can tell the future; how can anyone in this group argue something of which they have no knowledge?

Write the standard for a better future instead of writing it based on current thought patterns and hacks.

Tim Berners-Lee developed HTML with a vision of how things could be better.  He didn't develop it to carry the same problems we had with ARPAnet and MILnet.  It was a solution to a problem.  

All standards should be developed as solutions to problems.  Then Browser Vendors and WYSIWYG Editor Vendors can build their tools to use the new standard.  It does not say that they can't have a fallback position.

So what if Browser Vendors have to develop a new parser.  Browsers still support HTML3.2.  Heck, they even support HTML2.0.  They will continue to support those standards regardless.  We're just setting up a new standard that's easier to deal with and easier to learn for the novice and the professional alike.

Let's take a quick look at HDTV standards.  My wonderful 20 year-old 25" TV that's still running as well as it did the day we turned it on will no longer be useful when the HDTV standard is fully implemented.  That's a waste of a wonderful television because TV stations will no longer be providing the old broadcast standard.  

Why should HTML5 be any different?  Don't rebuttal with the hype that we will be breaking the Web.  Browser Vendors have the choice of supporting the older standards with their current parsers.  I foresee (if I'm allowed to do that, maybe wishful thinking) that Browser Vendors will eventually cease supporting older standards.  Windows 3.x, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me, and so forth expire their support.  However, people continue to use them.  

Web designers will need to make a choice, let their 1994 HTML3.2 Web page die or fix it.  People will turn to WYSIWYG Editor Vendors for a better toolset.  HTML5 will be the basis for that toolset.  HTML5 should not include instructions on how to parse removed codes.

If we're going to tell Browser Vendors how to handle a piece of code, then we should expect that all Browser Vendors parse the code in the same manner.  No more box models, quirks mode, or any other hack job.  No more IE adding a border around an element and Mozilla, Opera, and Safari making the border part of the element's space.  Presentations will appear in the same way across all browsers.

We're here to remove all confusion and develop a better plan for the future.  Let's do that.

Regards,
Lee Roberts


-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Anne van Kesteren
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:15 AM
To: Philip Taylor (Webmaster); www-html@w3.org; public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Cleaning House


On Thu, 03 May 2007 16:10:02 +0200, Philip Taylor (Webmaster)  
<P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk> wrote:
>> Show me an example of a popular WYSIWYG editor that does this.
>
> We're designing an HTML dialect for tomorrow, not for today.
> Forget what current editors do : think about what tomorrow's
> editors /could/ and /should/ do.

We should also remain realistic. I've yet to see an editor that does that  
and has been successful. Both on the web and outside it. If in the future  
such an editor comes to exist we can always update the specification.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:36:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:44 UTC