W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2008

Re: An HTML language specification

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 06:30:44 +0000 (UTC)
To: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0811230629080.17401@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008, Jim Jewett wrote:
> > 
> > Are you proposing splitting just the DOM, or the DOM and the 
> > implementation requirements?
> 
> I am not certain that I understand what you mean by "implementation 
> requirements."

The rules that apply to implementations, like how to parse an HTML file, 
how to submit a form, how CSS and HTML interact, how the DOM should be 
implemented, etc.


> Assuming that I do correctly understand what you mean by "implementation 
> requirements", then those should also be split from the vocabulary -- 
> but it might well make sense to keep them with the DOM.

Why would authors who write scripts be ok with reading a spec that 
included implementation details when authors who don't write scripts 
wouldn't be ok with reading a spec that included scripting details?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 23 November 2008 06:31:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:59 UTC