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

Re: Should we Publish a Language Specification?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:59:21 +0100
Message-ID: <49293789.9010600@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

Ian Hickson wrote:
> ...
>> Why is a/@rel not useful for the browser platform?
> Some <a rel=""> values (e.g. stylesheet) are, others (e.g. tag) are not. I 
> just meant to refer to rel=tag above.

You mean the actual string "tag" as rel value?

>> The latter ones are useful features of HTML5 as a document markup 
>> language, so of course they should be in.
> One could also say that the scripting APIs are useful features of HTML5 as 
> an application markup language, so of course they should be in too.

As an application markup language yes, as a document markup language, no.

> How do you draw the line between "document" and "application", especially 
> given the state of the Web? Personally I think trying to draw a 
> distinction is old-fashioned. The Web has moved on, even static pages have 
> script (the penetration of analytics tools like Google Analytics and its 
> competitors is surprisingly high).

I think the state of the web really doesn't affect that distinction, and 
it's still a useful distinction to have.

>> I think I said before that in *my* opinion, forms submission could be a 
>> separate module, as it isn't needed as part of the *document* markup 
>> language.
> Should elements like <canvas> be in, then? How about <input> and <output>?

I already said <canvas> doesn't belong into it, as it requires script 
execution to be useful. I also talked about forms before; I personally 
think the document markup language shouldn't include them, but I do 
realize that this may be a minority opinion.

> ...

BR, Julian
Received on Sunday, 23 November 2008 11:00:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:39 UTC