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

Re: Things in HTML that I disagree with (Was: evidence of harm)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0906252144130.16244@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Shelley Powers wrote:
> >>
> >> I would like to see how some of these arguments were coached. Could 
> >> you point out in whatever mailing list is appropriate, the arguments 
> >> discussing, say keeping the div element?
> >
> > I would love to, but I really don't have the bandwidth to do that. If 
> > anyone would like to volunteer to document such discussions, I'd be 
> > happy to advise. I really would love it if we could have a wiki or 
> > something that documented the discussions behind all the decisions in 
> > the spec so far. Personally though, I feel I must focus on taking 
> > HTML5 forward and not on the equally large task of documenting how it 
> > got where it is.
> 
> Then, especially in comparison to your statement about you strongly 
> disagreeing with the microdata section, we have to assume that no, there 
> was never a situation where you vehemently opposed an addition (or 
> deletion) from the HTML5 spec, but allowed the working group to override 
> your objections.

I listed a number of cases where that was the case. I understand that you 
may not believe me, but if you think I am lying then I can't help you. I'm 
not going to do mailing list archeology that you could equally well do 
yourself just because you imply that I am being untruthful.


> >> Yes, the web is a messy place. I'm surprised that you're willing to 
> >> continue on as sole author of HTML 5, if you're so unhappy with the 
> >> state of the web, and the markup you're being forced to live with.
> >
> > Making the Web better is more important than my own personal sense of 
> > aethetics.
> 
> But you are applying your own personal sense of aesthetics in your work. 
> You may not think you are, but every author does. The wise author is 
> aware of this, and acts accordingly.

Naturally. I don't think anyone suggested that I do not.


> Frankly, in my opinion, your sense of aesthetics shows in your pushback 
> against @summary. You specify it causes "harm", but nobody has proved 
> that it actually causes "harm".

It has been shown that:

 - in many cases where summary="" attributes are present on non-layout 
   tables, they have bogus values that are less useful to users of ATs 
   than no value at all. This harms AT users.

 - in the few cases where summary="" values are actually useful, they 
   would be useful to all users, not just AT users, but using summary="" 
   means the data is hidden from non-AT users. This harms non-AT users.

The data for this has been repeatedly documented on this list.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 21:50:23 GMT

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