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

Re: ISSUE-55: Re-enable @profile in HTML5 (draft 1)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:24:00 +0200
Message-ID: <4AD57C90.3040406@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> ...
>> From time to time, I work for a number of government agencies that are 
>> mired in red tape. One of these pieces of red tape, a website deployment 
>> checklist, states that we must generate valid HTML documents from our 
>> back-end systems. We have a ton of HTML4 content that uses @rev and 
>> @profile (correctly). There is talk that some HTML5 features (such as 
>> <video>) should be used in the next revision of the system, so we are in 
>> a bit of a situation. We can't just change the headers of the HTML4 
>> documents we generate (the content of the documents were hand authored 
>> over 10 years ago) because @rev is now non-conforming and we can't 
>> deliver a system that doesn't allow the person overseeing the contract 
>> to check the box labeled "Documents are valid HTML".
>>
>> That's an example of why one would need to migrate legacy HTML4 
>> documents to HTML5... it's not a rendering issue, it's a validation 
>> issue.
> 
> If you have red tape that ensures you use the latest best practices, then 
> yes, you'd have to remove rev="" and profile="" as well as change the 
> DOCTYPE. This affects a very small portion of the authoring population, 
> though; a small-enough portion that it's an acceptable cost.
> ...

Well, the latest best practice for HTML5 maybe not to use @profile, but 
the latest best practice for other specs, such as GRDDL or DC-HTML *is* 
to include it.

> ...

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 07:24:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC