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

Re: Request for clarification on HTML 5 publication status (ISSUE-19)

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:15:20 -0800
Message-Id: <4E46ABBB-B295-4AC2-B125-A1E9BFA762B4@gbiv.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>

On Nov 29, 2007, at 2:53 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> The DOM and other features you mention are part of our charter  
> deliverables, so it would not make sense to remove them from the spec.

Not all deliverables need to be in a single spec.  What does need to
be in the spec is a definition of HTML that does not require a DOM,
because MOST implementations of HTML processing do not have a DOM.

>> The problem with publishing it is simply that the title is wrong.
>> It will mislead a lot of developers who are looking for a definition
>> of HTML and find, instead, a lot of half-baked ideas about how a
>> browser should compose a DOM, reinterpret HTTP, make useless  
>> requests,
>> and a lot of other things you've added to enshrine browser bugs.
>> It is not HTML5 by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> We already made a group decision that the spec title would be  
> HTML5. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor. We could certainly  
> revisit that old decision, but I seriously doubt it would go the  
> other way. I don't think it is reasonable to hold the FPWD hostage  
> to getting your way on the title.

I was not here for that vote, I don't generally vote based on what the
working group thinks (just what I think), and my vote does not hold
anything hostage.  [Dan was correct in not highlighting it as an issue
because it is not a formal objection.]  I only mention it because Ian
brought it up.

>> Call it "Uniform Browser Behavior for the Web" and my informal
>> objection is waived.
>
> As an aside, I don't think your proposed title is accurate. The  
> spec covers many conformance classes besides browsers, including  
> documents, editors, validators, and non-browser implementations. If  
> you wanted to call it "HTML Syntax, Semantics and Behavior for  
> Browsers, Documents, Editors, Validators, and Other Implementations  
> 5", then that would be accurate but I think pretty long-winded.

The spec covers everything, which is the problem.  HTML is not
everything.  HTML is a declarative data format for the interoperable
exchange of hypertext.

....Roy
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 23:15:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:51 UTC