- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:52:29 -0400
- To: sean@elementary-group-standards.com
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-html@w3.org, Robert Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
Sean Fraser wrote: > Sam, > >> From your blog post as noted, > >> On Wed 08/04/09 5:35 AM , Sam Ruby wrote: Additionally, I've >> written a blog post outlining an approach to dealing > with a number of issues which have been raised from outside of this > working group. [1] I believe what I described there is largely > consistent with the approach that Rob has suggested. > >> - Sam Ruby > >> [1] http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/04/08/HTML-Reunification > > would you please clarify this sentence: I'll try. Let me know if I succeed. > "This in no way precludes someone or a group producing a separate > best practices guidelines for authors, and if they want to suggest > that their version of best practices are in conflict with the > recommendations of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working > Group, the SVG Working Group, the Semantic Web Deployment Working > Group, I wish them luck." > > I do not understand this. At the IETF, there is a set of documents called "Best Current Practices" documents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_Current_Practice http://www.rfc-editor.org/categories/rfc-best.html If such a document were produced at the W3C and were to collect up the recommendations of the groups I referred to, it would state such things as @alt attributes are always mandatory on <img> tags, quotes around attribute values would be mandatory for all children of <svg> elements, and @property attributes with legal CURIE values would be considered conformant on <h2> elements (among many others). The current HTML 5 draft is currently at variance will all three. It also marks @profile attributes, <summary> and <font> elements as non-conforming. As I understand Rob's intentions, his document would focus only on interoperable browser behavior. As <font> is widely implemented and interoperable, it would be included in the document. He would gladly note, in a nice, even tone, any issues with interoperability that there might be (not so much with <font> elements, but there clear issues with <summary> elements and @profile attributes). But if somebody wants to write a companion BCP document that limits or even prohibits the use of <font> elements or requires quotes on every attribute value anywhere, then that would be fine. > Thanks, > > Sean Fraser - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 8 April 2009 19:53:10 UTC