W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2011

Re: ISSUE-179 av_param: Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 02:27:54 -0700
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1279F478-2AD2-4EEC-94F0-8F70F436364C@gbiv.com>
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
On Oct 30, 2011, at 12:19 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
>> As I pointed out in the change proposal rationale, x-* attributes are
>> unacceptable for use by other standards fora (and W3C WGs) for defining
>> specifications that involve additional A/V parameters. Such usage impedes
>> standardization.
> 
> On the contrary. It allows other standards fora to experiment with
> attributes that they believe are necessary and once those attributes
> have been proven to be necessary and widely accepted, they can be
> introduced into HTML by the W3C.

No, the x- prefix was originally intended to separate values that
will never be sent by compliant Internet hosts from those that will,
such that people using the same namespace inside software or internal
networks can use x-names without worrying about future conflicts.
It is not for experiments, proposals, ideas, and especially not
for standards.

I have no idea why people keep trying to use them in protocols.
No software should ever be deployed that uses an x-prefix outside
of its own internal communication.

....Roy
Received on Sunday, 30 October 2011 09:28:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:28 UTC