W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > October 2001

Re: HTML friendly links to metainformation

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2001 21:22:12 +0100
Message-ID: <00d601c159a5$042b3160$c2d893c3@y0r1d9>
To: "Nick Kew" <nick@webthing.com>, "Al Gilman" <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
Al:-
> > Of course, HTML WG are saying that XHTML 2.0 doesn't
> > have to be legacy-safe, [...]

Nick:-
> Or on second thoughts: yes, here's one printable comment.  It
> would be entirely wrong for them to introduce constructs that
> break back-compatibility gratuitously.

Jim:-
> I think in WAI terms, we do have to be legacy safe unless
> there's some incredibly powerful reason, anything that breaks
> current access technology is dangerous.

I'm afraid you're just repeating concerns that have already been expressed.
I ranted about exactly this topic on www-html (which is the proper venue
for this discussion) back in August.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/0057
- My original note
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/0085
- Reply from the WG chair
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/0088
- Reply from Bjoern, exposing a badly written detail in my original note
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/0089
- My reply to the chair, clarifying my position
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/0090
- My reply to Bjoern, clarifying my position

the thread continued through August:-

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2001Aug/

Result: XHTML 2.0 will be backwards incompatable with good cause, the HTML
WG hopefully won't twist it to meet UA implementation of base-level XML
functionality.

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Saturday, 20 October 2001 16:24:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:39 GMT