- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 07:00:21 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>, PSIG <member-psig@w3.org>
On 04/14/2011 05:51 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Thu, 14 Apr 2011, Steve Faulkner wrote: >> >> But what we do have now is 2 specifications both claiming to be HTML5 >> that are not in agreement. > > The WHATWG spec is just HTML, not HTML5. There's a whole section (the > first section) that goes to quite some length to explain this. That section isn't as clear as it could be: http://tinyurl.com/3bpapzm "Is this HTML5? ... In short: Yes." Additionally, it would be wonderful if the following site were updated to reflect the position that the WHATWG spec doesn't describe HTML5: http://developers.whatwg.org/ A concrete example of a point where this creates confusion: http://developers.whatwg.org/links.html#ping ... which was dropped from HTML5 by amicable consensus: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Mar/0132.html - Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 11:00:45 UTC