W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

RE: Implementation of head@profile

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:13:53 -0800
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8B62A039C620904E92F1233570534C9B0118C8658CED@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>

> But it is as easy for a client to detect something 
> that looks like a microformat and process it without the profile as it 
> is for the authoring tool to detect it and insert the profile. 

I think this perspective is the root of many HTML disagreements:
that something "is as easy" to do correctly client processing time
than it is at authoring time.

I disagree strongly.

Perhaps browser vendors or their search engine vendor partner(s)
have proprietary browse-time ways of inferring what should
have been put in by authors for table summaries, image alt tags
or header profiles, but in all cases, this is information that
the author likely knows better than the browser, and it is
completely unreasonable to remove the mechanisms by which
such information can be conveyed (with table@summary and 
head@profile) or to discourage authors from supplying it
(with img@alt).


Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 22:14:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:42 UTC