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

RE: Section 1.6.1 relationship to HTML 4.01

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:49:38 +0000 (UTC)
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0906120743320.1648@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Larry Masinter wrote:
>
> The discussion on "Design Principles" brought up the "(from scratch)" 
> topic, which led to discussion of Section 1.6.1, "Relationship to HTML 
> 4.01 and DOM2 HTML". I think updating the introductory material now is 
> useful, because it is important to reviewers trying to understand the 
> document and its context.
> 
> I think you asked for an explicit suggestion for new wording:
> 
> OLD
> 
> > 1.6.1 Relationship to HTML 4.01 and DOM2 HTML
> 
> > This specification represents a new version of HTML4, along with a new version 
> > of the associated DOM2 HTML API. Migration from HTML4 to the format and 
> > APIs described in this specification should in most cases be straightforward, 
> > as care has been taken to ensure that backwards-compatibility is
> >  retained. [HTML4] [DOM2HTML]
> 
> NEW
> 
> < 1.6.1 Relationship to HTML 4.01 and DOM2 HTML
> 
> < This specification represents a new version of HTML, including its DOM2 API.
> < This specification is based on widespread implementations and experience 
> < with HTML 4, but not the verbatim text of previous specifications[HTML4][DOM2HTML].
> < A separate document [HTMLDIFF] explains differences with HTML 4
> < in detail.  Migration to the format and APIs described in this specification
> <  should be straightforward, as backwards compatibility was a high priority. 
> 
> This does not claim to be a new version of HTML 4.01 and makes it clear 
> that the text did not start with the HTML 4.01 document. It makes an 
> explicit reference to the Differences document for details. It does not 
> promise ("ensure") backwards compatibility but notes that it was a goal. 
> If the working group continues work on Design Principles, a reference to 
> [DESIGN] would be appropriate, for elaboration on the "backwards 
> compatibility" principles would be useful.

I've tweaked the text a bit. I still haven't explicitly said "we didn't 
start from the HTML4 text", because I really don't understand how that 
matters or what it tells the reader, and I couldn't find a way to explain 
why we didn't that didn't sound like inside baseball.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions, or if the new text is still 
not satisfactory.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 12 June 2009 07:50:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:38 GMT