W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: ISSUE-89 Change Proposal

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 13:47:38 -0700
Message-ID: <dd0fbad1003261347g6e901e17rdc205f02835cc170@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> Removing this section prevents possible future confusion about what is
> a requirement, and what is one suggestion out of the pool of possible
> suggestions. This change also ensures that the best markup to use for
> specific purposes is allowed to develop organically, and the best
> practices emerge naturally.

Can't this requirement be fulfilled more easily, and while maintaining
the benefits of having the guide that authors requested (and that I
find useful), by just adding an introduction to the section to
explicitly state that these are merely suggested patterns to aid
authors, and should not be construed as requiring any specific markup
for these concepts?

Basically, attempting to divine the most sane and accessible way to
mark up certain types of data can be non-trivial.  Especially if
you're trying to do something quickly and don't devote much thought to
it, it's easy to do something weird, crazy, or unaccessible.  Having
these idioms for particularly tricky types of content is a good thing.
 If there are any concerns about this being taken as more than
recommendations, let's just make that clear, rather than removing it
entirely and leaving authors to have to redevelop these from scratch
over and over again.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 26 March 2010 20:48:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:15 UTC