W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > July 2012

Re: [whatwg] Administrivia: Update on the relationship between the WHATWG HTML living standard and the W3C HTML5 specification

From: Bronislav Klučka <Bronislav.Klucka@bauglir.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:36:30 +0200
Message-ID: <5010046E.5070904@bauglir.com>
To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org

On 25.7.2012 16:04, David Bruant wrote:
> Le 25/07/2012 15:32, Bronislav Klučka a écrit :
>> And my last remark: I hope major browser vendors will chose to follow 
>> the same path, the same implementation of tasks, but not all major 
>> vendors are part of WHATWG (as far as I know), and if some choose to 
>> follow W3C and some different WHATWG drafts of the same task, what 
>> would happen?
> Interesting question...
>
>> (Thou I do not think it actually will happen). To put it simply, it 
>> does not matter, what either W3C or WHATWG codify, what matter is, 
>> what browsers implement - it was always about vendors...
> ... which you answer yourself to.
> If the WHATWG continue to work in ways that we know (including 
> codifying de facto standards to preserve content backward 
> compatibility), then no matter what browsers will to do (follow one 
> spec or several or none), the end result is that the WHATWG will 
> codify what works.
> As an example, they spec'ed innerHTML which was first implemented in 
> IE (and followed by all others) which isn't part of the WHATWG. There 
> are probably dozens of these examples.
This goes to my "Interesting question", I do understand the advantage of 
"codifying supported convention", but in case of differences... And it's 
already happening (on vendor level... maybe not differences at the same 
task, but different approaches on similar tasks, decisions not to 
implement some parts of WebApp - but I guess it's inevitable).

>
>> W3C forgot that.
> Who did? I mean, the actual people. Who should we be talking to to 
> convince them that web standards are more the consequence of an 
> implementation rather than the opposite (regardless of whether this is 
> a good situation or not)?
>
> David
I do not know who actually decided, that W3C will be inventor instead of 
codifier... It's like 14 years ago :). And I'm not in either group. Just 
remembering those times :) You should ask the people that were behind 
creation of WHATWG (there must have been a reason why some vendors, part 
of WG working on web tech, decided to leave and start their own project 
- there must have been someone opposing the idea of fast progress of 
HTML, there must have been someone trying to push XHTML2 at all costs, 
there must have been someone who though, that vendors opinion is 
irrelevant, or less important).

I was just looking at WHATWG wiki and there is nice sentence: "In 
general the WHATWG will ensure that the normative content of the 
specifications (the requirements on authors and implementors) remains 
the same so long as the W3C group doesn't demonstrate any serious lapses 
in judgement."


B.
Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 14:37:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:09 GMT